Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-03-02
A MESSAGE FROM STONE.
The Governor Sends q Remarkable
Document to the Legislature.
He Uses the Imprisonment OF tho st.
Clair County Judges . Basis for
. Criticism OF the Federal Court
Action Suggested

sent the most remarkable communication to
the legislature yesterday morning that has been
read In the legislative hall since the war. II
relates to the imprisonment of the judges of the
county court OF st. Clair county by order of
Judge Philips, of the United States court of the
Western district of Missouri, and scores the
federal judiciary for interfering with state af-
fairs The reading of the communication was
listened to with the most profound silence. 4
resolution to print 5000 copies was adopted.
Several resolutions proposing protest to con-
gress against unwarranted interference on the
part Of the federal judiciary were offered. and
for half an hour the orators were turned loose
and the federal courts were denounced in the
most emphatic language. Finally the resoln-
tions were all referred to the judiciary commit
tee. The same matter was read in the senate
and referred to the judiciary committee.
Gov. Stones Message.
To THE SENATE AND HOUSE OF REPRESENTA-
TIyEs[I feel constrained to call the attention
OF the general assembly to a matter which
consider one of great importance. 1 refer to
the Imprisonment of county judges under the
process OF the federal courts. To-day the
judges OF the county court of ST. Clair county
are imprisoned in a common Jail at Kansas
City. under the order of the United States cir
cult court for the Western district of Missouri.
The onense for which they stand imprisoned is
disobedience to the order of the said circuit
court commanding them to levy certain taxes
on the property of the people, to pay certain
judgments rendered in that court against the
county on bonds issued ostensibly to aid in the
construction of railroad. These bonds were
issued soon after the war, at time when dis
order generally prevailed in that section of the
state, where large number OF the taxpayers
were disfranchised and denied all voice in
determining whether the bonds should be is
sued. and denied all representation in the con-
duct Of public affairs. The bonds were issued
to an irresponsible corporation, ostensibly to
in no cor ofr rcfi Cfo raj
road, although not q foot of road has ever been
constructed. and the enterprise has been long
since abandoned. The people of the county
have always and uniformly maintained that the
law. as 1t then stood was not complied with by
the de facto authorities then in control Of the
county in issuing the bonds-that they were
fraudulently and illegally issued. I am in
formed that the first suits in which the legality
of the bonds was tested was brought in the state
circuit court. and that that court held that the
bonds had been issued in contraventiOn of the
constitution and laws of the state, and were
therefore, void and OF no effect. But the
bondholderS, not content to abide
by the decision of the state
court, brought suit on other bonds in the
United States court, and that court held
the bonds to be commercial paper, valid
and binding on the county. Since then a con-
test has been going on in the federal court be-
tween the bondholderS and the people. one
seeking to enforce, the other to resist. the col
lection of the bonds. Judgments are rendered
against the county the bonds. and man.
damuses are then issued to the county judges
commanding them to levy and cause to be col
lected sufficient taxes to pay the judgments
am informed that the judgments in said circuit
court now standing against ST. Clair county ag-
gregate about $4,000. Because the judges
fused to obey the writ of mandus commanding
them to levy a tax to pay these judgments, they
have been committed to Jail for an indefinite
period for contempt.
have thus briefly outlined the history of
this controversy that the general assembly
esteem the greater part OF 1t as being OF any eS-
peeial importance to the present consideration.
For the purposes of the present consideration
do not care to inquire whether the bonds are
legal or illegal. My immediate purpose is to
call attention to the fact that the county judges
of this county are restrained of their liberty, at
a point remote from their homes, and, am in
formed will not be permitted to return to dis
charge any official duty until they con-
sent to levy the tax required by the
order of the federal court. This they
refuse to do. D because the people Of
the county, who regard the bonds as fraudu-
lent, are exasperated at a judicial decree which
they regard vicious and disregardful of all
better precedent and of the public right. and
therefore forbid it. and (2) because they can
not levy so large tax as they are commanded
to levy for this purpose without violating the
statutes of the state and thereby subjecting
themselves to indictment and severe penalties
imposed by the courts of the state. Under the
laws of this state the judges Of the county court
have absolutely no original power to levy such
q tax. The law of the state authorizes the
county courts to levy taxes to limited extent
in counties of the class of st. Clair to the ex-
tent of one-haK Of per cent. or 50 cents on the
800 of valuation But that tax is expressly de-
current county expenses. and for that
only. The constitution and statutes of the
states confer Jurisdiction upon the coun-
ty courts to levy this limited tax for specific
purposes. and the same laws specify the uses
to which these revenues shall be appropriated:
that Is to say for purely county purposeS-for
the support Of the poor and insane for roads
and bridges. for the payment of salaries of
county ofdcials. for witnesses and jury fees,
election expenses and the like. The laws of
the state provide that the county court shall
have no original jurisdiction to levy any other
tax: and If a necessity exists for an additional
tax to pay existing debt. or there is any oc-
caSion for an extraordinary tax. another course
OF proceeding is required. No original juris-
diction is conferred upon the county courts
to levy q tax to meet any such extraor-
binary demands: but. on the contrary,
such jurisdiction Is expressly withheld When
the necessity of an extraordinary tax exists
the law requires that the county court shall
cause the county attorney to prepare and
present a petition to the state circuits eourt
which is a court of common law jurisdiction, or
to the judge in vacation. setting forth the rea-
son and the necessity for the tax, and all the
facts connected with it: and the circuit court,
or judge. shall examine the petition, and. after
understanding the facts il he shall hold that
the debt is a valid one and the tax proper one
to be levied. he can issue his order authorizing
and empowering the county court to levy the
tax; which order may be Il continuing one from
year to year. long as the necessity for the tax
exists or until it is revoked by the order of the
court which made It
The county court, say. Is devoid of jurisdic-
tion and power to levy the tax in the first In
stance. The power to make the levy does not
manner provided by law. This view of the law
has been distinctly and repeatedly affirmed by
the supreme court of this state. Any violation
of this law would subject the county judges to
heavy penalties and the forfeiture Of their Of
fees.
. am informed that o few years since an ap-
plication was made. as provided by statute. to
the circuit judge for an order to levy tax to
pay judgments rendered on these bonds In the
federal court; but that the circuit Judge. hold
ing the bonds to be void. refused to authorize
the levy. The county judges, therefore, are, as
they contend. without authority to make the
levy required by the order Of the federal court,
and any attempt to make It would subject them
to the penalties Of the law. Thus these state
oficials are placed helpless between these con-
tending forces. II they attempt to levy the tax
thew are liable to be visited with severe pun
ishment from the state courts, sitting in a
county where the people would sternly resent
such . levy; and II they decline TO levy they
are confined In o common jail. far from home.
in company with every class OF criminals. This
alone presents grave and serious question for
the consideration Of the general assembly. rep
resenting. as it does, in so high degree. the dig
,;fv v,ovar avd aovArefuntv nf the ri