Mineral Point tribune. (Mineral Point, Wis.) 1869-1938, 1874-06-25

TO individual or corporation, and no earthly
power had any moral or legal right TO say
nay: and they were near saying it. The poo
pie, however, had the equal power and right
TO say that the Legislature might grant fran
chlses TO corporations; and they also had the
same ample power to make any reservation
that 10 them might seem for the
benefit of themselves or their descend
ants. There was no contract to interfere
They did say to all beggars for franchises,
" If you take charter and franchise from
these our servants, and get it in form we
now or in the future disapprove of, or if YOU
cypress us or do any act we disapprove of,
We viii, al our pleasure, alter-which in
cludes regulation-or repeal-whch means
take away--and resume to ourselves, to our
own use this granted emanation of our SOW
ereignty, by the action of any future assembly
OF our servants, elected by us and assembled
for that purpose
With this condition in full view, these acts
OF incorporation were lohbied through the
Legislature, accepted by the subscribers to the
stock or money loaned on the security of
these same franchises to aid in construction of
the roads, with full notice of all the facts.
This was more than a limitation within the
meaning of the opinion of the Supreme Court
in the Dartmouth College case; it was part
OF the contract; yes, more, IT was condition
precedent, and no contract by the Legislature
granting it is Of any validity unless this con
dition precedent is recognized as a part of it.
In addition to the several points before
stated, it is confidently assumed that the full
power and moral right of the people TO attach
this condition, to enact and stand by this linn
itauon, is beyond question.
Without looking up aud citing the case, |
am fully persuaded that the Supreme Court of
our State, perhaps not by the same course of
reasoning, has covered the same ground and
arrived at the same conclusions; possibly not
in any one case; but this will be found to be
the current of authority running through
many cases.
Mr.. Smith then discusses at some length the
prospect Of an adverse decision by the.United
States Supreme Court and says that all the
people of Wisconsin will ask is a strict appi
cation of the law as laid down in the opinion
of Chief.Justice Marshall in the Dartmouth
College case, and concludes his opinion as
follows:
l must in fairness admit that the Legisla-
ture on repeal OF the charter, nsigh transfer
the personal property of the company to the
stockholders, and naigH continue the corpora
ton to collect its debts, if the common law
had been repealed, and also to pay its debts as
far as it could by that means | am not,
however, prepared to admit that the Legisla-
ture has done any such thing.
l attn by no means prepared to admit that
this same'rule applies to the real estate or
lands and improvements on it. On the con-
trary, my opinion is that the grantor of these
lands has vested interest in them, not to be
Invested without full compensation, unless
the power is derived from this much-abused
constitutional provision. 1t may be that by
repeating act the Legislature might reserve to
the corporators all its lands and appurtenances;
but, certain it is, TO my mind, that in case of
civil death by lapse of time, or forfeiture of
charter by proceedings in the nature of qto
1rdrrdutO for violation of it, the grantOrs of
these lands have in them vested right which
cannot be Invested by any act of legislation,
unless the same act provides for compensation
to the owner of the reversion, aud takes 1t
under the right of eminent domain for public
use.
There is one more position taken by the
Judge, and indeed by all the counsel of the
railroads. that | cannot pass by without no.
tice and that is that bondholders, as mort
gagor, have vested rights that cannot be af-
fected by the constitutional limitation, The
answer to this position has been given in
general terms. To sum it up in few words:
The people have the prior incumbrance, and
the Con, titution is in the law notice to all the
world of their rights The moncy-leuder can
get no greater interest in the property than
the borrower had, AS it appeared of record
when the loan was made.