, 1874-07-14
t TIE ts+---E
a MISTAKEN VIEW,

n MISTAKEN VIEW -.
Tho New York Commercial! aud TYuanoio
chrontclc mnkos light OF tho rocout decision O
tho Unitel statos Circuit Court at MntliBon. |,
tho matter Of tho Wisconsin railways. 1
thinks TINT thore Ia no good ground for th
prevalent boliof that tho decision OF tho ,OourI
WAS worry unfavorhblc to tho roada., Tho 0aroni
ole says that tho Court in no way Expressed at
opinion upon tho moaning Of tho words " alto,
or repoal" in tho WisconBin Constitution. It
thinks that oyon under this. provision
of tho Constitution tho charter Of tho roai
cannot be taken away without tuat, CAUSE
unless tho State frat rotmburscs tho par.
tsoa owning tho roads. It argues that
| although tho stato. Of Wisconsin has: male
tho reservation In question. Its powors IN.
dor that reservation arc modified and govorned
by d higher Inv" which requires Individuals
and statos alike to respect vested rights,-righta
vested with its approval and under Its sanction
and inducomont It olatma Tint to advocate tho
contrary would be against Justice aud truo poll
oy; that II q stato Induces money to bo spent
and contracts to DO mado within Its limits. It
will not DO allowed to conflBoate that money or
to repudlato thoao contracts. It says, therefore,
that tho Court decided aa nearly Us possible
nothing; and lnsinuates that It gayo decision
at all only as 20 mattor Of form, boing do
eirous, as the quoations raiscd woro worry
important, to got tho opinion Of tho
6upromo Court Of tho United 8tatos as soon az
possible. 1t anya, moreover, that tho Judge who
garc the conclusions Of tie Court mado ono or
two remarks which might bo construed to 10 q
litt1o farther than this; but TINT thoy wore
simply hfa off-hand views very loosely and by
no moans Clearly Expressed, aud that tin no
sonee could tho Court be hold responsible for
them, or be said to hayo adopted tlom."
With tho position Of tho Chronicle on the
question OF taking property without duo COM
ponsation wo lavo no fault to find. It is SUBJ
stantial1y tho same as that which wo maintained
boforc tho decision. Tho CArontclo Is, Aoweyor,
entirely wrong In Bupposing that tho Court was
not profoundly in earnest in tts decision. Tho
Court found that It could not erase from tho
Constitution Of Wisconsin tho words "a1ter
or ropoal," and that to havo giyon any
other doclaton would Eayo boon to do 60,
The question whether tho Legislature Ind tho
powor to alter or repeal without cauao shown, ,
was fully before tho Court and was decided In
tho affirmative. It is truo TINT tho Court SAW
tho case would be carried up to tho Supreme
Court, but that had nothing to do with tho do
Dision itsof, einco tho Attorney General Of Wis
sonsin would hnvo carried 1t there, 1t defeated,
With just Us much dispatch as tho Railway Com
panies. Nor wore the conclusions Of tho Court
imply tho oft-hand yiews Of Judge Drummond,
ooscly and confuaodly Expressed. Judge Drum
nond Is not in tho habit Of patmlng OH his
ofr-hand" views rs law, especially In very
important caaea; nor ts ho guilty Of expressing |
'imaolf loosely or coufuscdly.
It Is altogether best for tho railways, and |
lnancal interests connected With thon, to un-
leratand that tho Judgea at Madison wcro not |!
lolding village lycoum when they gavo their
ocision, but TINT they meant all TINT thoy said.