Mower County transcript. [volume] (Lansing, Minn.) 1868-1915, 1877-01-11

close the mortgage securing the bonds. She
again implied their validity when she re-
holding the bonds as se cur ity for circulating
notes, to make good the de acft resulting from
their depreciation. The validity Of the
bonds was again implied when in 1860 the
State authorities refused tOSabate taxes upon
them on the ground Of their Questionable val
idity, and she has repeatedly implied their
validity by taxing them at their face.
direct support of the validity Of these bonds
The courts have repeatedly affirmed this in
express terms. The validity OF the toreclos-
ures OF the instruments securing the bonds
and Of the titles OF the present companies
based therein, were sustained by the Supreme
Court Of this State in the case OF Paro he
against the First Division OF the st. Paul &
page 297), and long line Of decisions with
which our reports are filed. 1t these bonds
were void the titles resting upon them would
he worthless. .
Upon denial Of the validity of the bonds,
made upon the ground Of the illegal incon-
gruity OF State legislature uniting with
Territorial governor, in the passage Of the
States Circuit Court, disposed Of the question
in the following energetic language:
''That the bonds held by the plaintiff are
the legal obligations Of the State and binding
upon It in law, honor, and justice have no
doubt; indeed counsel have not seriously
questioned that these bonds were not valid:
They were issued pursuant to all amendment
to the Constitution of the State, adopted by
popular vote OF about thirty five thousand
for, to eight thousand against, have been re-
peatedly recognized as valid by subsequent
legislation OF the State and by the foreclosure
proceedings. UEder these circumstances the
tact that it does not appear the acting Govern
or Of the State signed the bill providing tor
the submission to the people OF the loan
no consequence. In the amendment to the
constitution the faith and credit Of the State
are pledged for the payment of the interest
and the redemption Of the principal of the
bonds; they are signed by the Governor and
bear upon their face the seal of the State.
They were issued to the plaintiff and others
for grading and work actually done upon
tioanl amendment; and the State obtained the
benefit of the securities it took for its indem-
MITIGATION and re-granted the property it ac-
quired free from all liens to the present COM
panies. Under these circumstances il the
State were suable in the courts there can he
no doubt that the bonds would he legally en-
tOrcable against it. Justice and honor alike re-
quire the State to recognize these bonds as
binding upon it, and in the end the court can
not doubt that the people of the State will so
ordain. AState with such future before it
as the State OF Minnesota can not afford to
bear the odium of reputation. And it there
were no other difficulties i'll the plaintiffs
way except the suggested one that his bonds
are iuyyalGid;, he will be entitled to the relief
1t has been intimated by certain newspapers
that the distinguished jurist who delivered
this opinion, went outside the record to read
the State lecture upon her duties in the
premises; careful examination Of the record
will, it is believed, show that this charge is
unjust; but however this may be. it will be
conceded that the highest tribunal in the
land, as at present constituted, has estab-
lished no precedent which would justify such
against the plaintiff in the circuit court, the
plaintiff promptly took an appeal to the Su-
prerne Court Of the United States.
The question OF the constitutionality of the
concurrent resolutions of the State Legisla-
ture of 1860 forbidding the payment OF the
bonds without an affirmative vote OF the peO-
pie, coming directly before the United States
were pronounced void because in violation OF
the contract which the State had made with
the old companies.
In this state Of the case the court decided as
follows:
''rhe faith OF the State, solemnly pledged
for the payment OF both principal and inter-
est, has never been kept. So far from keep
adopted an amendment to its constitution
prohibiting any law which levied tax or
made other provision for ;such payment TAX
ing effect until the same had been submitted
to vote of the people and been adopted by
them. This prohibition, ifnot q violation Of
the States pledge, conflicts with its spirit.
The bonds issued are valid obligations. The
faith, to pay them. Were she amenable to
the tribunals of the country as private in.
dividua.s are, no court OF justice would with
hold its Judgment against her in an action
for their enforcement"
s'The State was primarily liable to the bond
holders and it was only between her and the
companies that the relation OF principal and
surety existed. It may be doubted whether
the bondholders could call upon the COM
pany at any event."
1t has been intimated that these decisions
were obtained by collision between the plain
till and the companies to obtain a decision
against the State; the character of the coun-
sci engaged, as well as that. OF the tribunals be-
fore whom the cases. were pending forbid such
q ouspiGlou Allu ~ Suuclcut answer u SUCH
an insinuation.
The complaint that she was not q party to
the litigation surely comes with bad grace
from State which has refused repeated invi i.
tations to submit her pretended detences to
the scrutiny OF the courts, and wrapping the
mantle of her sovereignty around her, has al
ways carefully avoided all investigation; the
plaintiff, it may be supposed, could have been
only too willing to have made her party, had
t been possible.
In the case of Farnsworth vs.. the N1inneso-
t. 4 Pacific Rail Road Company trial, the
Court said, f"The adoption the constitutional
amendment OF 1860, certainly had the effect
to impair the value of the bonds OF the State;
but it is the holders ofthese bonds who had
the right to complain of this proceeding; not
the company nor the trustees under the deed
in suit. The holders of those bonds looked
in the first instance to the State tor payment
they were therefore injuriously affected by the
It is difficult to see why these decisions
10 not ettectually dispel the clouds and mists
y hich have SO long developed the subject,
leaving the golden line of duty stretching out
clear and distinct before the representatives
OF the people, and the State of Minnesota must
hereafter stand dumb when questioned as to
why she does not walk by it.
With such unmistakable and imperative
commands from the voice Of law, equity and
honor, Is the question not reduced to the
simple one of our willingness to pay an honest
debt? And can our young State with so tair a
tuture-as member of the sisterhood in tbs
triumphant era of the nations centenary-at-
ford to rest under so damaging an imputation?
In my last annual message pointed out the
practical means by which we can readily fol-
low the plain path of duty: now commend
the subjec: once more to your considerate at
tention and earnestly invoke such prompt
and honorable action as becomes the repre-
sentatives of an honest and Christian people.
BIENNIAL SESSIONS.
recommended to the last legislative ses-
sion the submission to the people OF a propo-
sal for a constitutional amendment providing
tor biennial sessions of the legislature. In.
formation Of the practical workings OF such
alternate assemblages in other States, as well
as further reflection upon the subject, have
SO tar confirmed my conviction of the wisdom
OF such change that feel impelled to renew
the recommendation. The plan seems to me
to possess every advantage in Joint of econ
omy and in the avoidance of hurtful tamper-
ing with laws before they have been long
enough in operation to test their character.
Biennial sessions are held in about fifteen
States OF the Union. The fact that sew
eral of these States are younger than