The Russellville Democrat., 1880-03-04
THE TISHBACK AMEND
 NfENT.

will be found in another column Tn to-day's paper The amendment is now before the voters of the State, and at the September election they will be called upon to decide by their vote whether or not it shall be en- grafted upon, and become part of our organic law.
 There is quite a diversity of opin- ion on the subject among our promi- nent politicians and newspapers some whose fidelity to the best inter ests of the State cannot be question ed, contending that it ought to be adopted; and others of equal deyo- tion to the welfare and honor of our State, contending that it would be ruinous to us. There is ample time between now and the election to thoroughly discuss the measure and examine all sides of the question, and it is to be hoped that suffici- ent light will be thrown upon the subject in the discussion of it to en- able the voter to arrive at an intel ligeut conclusion. We shall try to keep our readers posted upon any and all important developments CT facts which may be adduced by the dis cussion and agitation of the meas ure. So far as onr own individual predilections on thls subject are con cerned, we have no hesitation in say ing that we are squarely opposed to the adoption of the amendment. We are oppsed to it on general princi- ples. We do not approve of this method of settling this kind of a question. It is too much like call ing upon jury to decide case without the jurymen having the law or the evidence before them. There are hundreds and thousands of cleo tors who will vote on this proposit- Ion without knowing any more about the merits of the measure than a goose knows about grammar. We have judicial tribunals composed of men learned in the law and invested with the power and authority to col lect all evidence bearing upon the legal and equitable aspects of dispu- ted questions, and sworn to render fair, just and impartial decisions, to settle all and such cases as this. We are opposed to taking this matter out of their hands, and submitting it to another tribunal having far less facilities for arriving at a correct and just decision.
 We are opposed to it because we are opposed to the repudiation of equitable claims either by individ- uals or States. We are opposed to it because 1t would do our State an in jury and place her before the world in q most unenviable light. We all know just how private individu- al is looked upon who repudiates a personal pecunlary obligation. It will effect our State the same way.
 We are opposed to it because we see no good to be accomplished bs it. The highest judicial authority in the State has already passed up on most of the indebtedness cover. ed by the amendment, and decided it to be illegal, null and void.
 We are in favor of the State pay ing every dollar of equitable debts against her. and opposed to the pay ment of any more. It is claimed by those who are in position to know more about the matter than we know that the Fishback amendment em' braces a class or classes of claims portion ot which Is just & equita ble. There is no provision in the amendment for giving the holders of these claims any hearing or oppOr tunIty to establish the equity ol justice or legality ol any portion thereof and we are opposed to the amend ment on that score also. If, as the author of the amendment claims there is no equity in any portion oI the indebtedness embraced in it, nc part of it will ever be paid for we have faith enough Tn our courts, ant confidence enough in our law-mak CTS, to believe that they will never saddle debt upon the State whicl is both illegal and devoid of equity So why bring upon ourselves tho odium of repudiation by the adop ton of this amendment2
 
 The Logan County Enterprise