Iron County register. [volume] (Ironton, Iron County, Mo.) 1867-1965, 1893-10-26
Philips and His Usurpation.


In attempting to justify his barbaric
and wholly indefensible action in inn
prisoning the St. Clair County Judges
for debt, Judge Philips assumes that
they are executive officers and that, as
they are SO, he has power to compel
them to do what he assumes to be their
duty.
This is his reply when it is asked, if
a United States Court can compel a
Judge to perform duty imposed by
the laws of the State and not of the
United States. why the same court can
pei member of the Legislature or any
State officer to discharge duties I'M
posed under State laws, even to the
extent of assuming entire control of the
State, whenever non-residents ask that
such control should be exercised over
State in their interest.
The defense is frivolous. Judge
Philips has just as much right to lock up
one executive officer as another. He
has as much right to commit Governor
Stone to the Penitentiary as he has
to commit any executive officer of Mis-
souri, to Jail, as a means of forcing the
collection of debt.
Leaving out of consideration the re-
lations of the State to the Federal
Government. it is evident that when
the courts undertake to run the whole
government through their writs, they
are usurping power. Neither under
State law nor under Federal law has
Judge Philips the right to assume exec
utive functions and to attempt the
whole task of government.
If he says that when he decides that
a debt should be paid, he must enforce
his process, it must be replied that his
process for the collection of debt lies
rightly against property and not against
the person Or any citizen of Missouri
Or Of the United States. And, more
over. that if enforced, it must be by
the officers of his own court.
The County Judges of st. Clair
County are required by the law of the
State to perform such legislative func-
tions for the county as the Municipal
Assembly of St. Louis performs for the
city. The imposition of tax is
legislative function and Judge Philips
has just as much right to lock up the
entire Municipal Assembly of ST. Louis
for refusing to pass ordinances under
his dictation as he has to imprison
these judges for refusing to perform an
aldermanic function by his order.
Judge Philips has jurisdiction over
officers of his own court. He can ord
er them to seize and sell property to
satisfy his judgment, and if they refuse
he has jurisdiction to lock them up for
contempt. But when he attempts to |
make either an executive or legislative
officer enforce the process of his court,
it is lawless usurpation that nothing |
can excuse. 1t is not the business of |
the State officers of Missouri to enforce
the processes of Judge Philips court.
He has officials who are paid for such
work, and if it is not their BUSINESS,
if they cannot do it lawfully, It cannot
be lawfully done at all.
The whole truth of this case is that
Judge Philips intended to imprison and
did imprison these citizens of Missouri
for purposes of extortion. He has
gone beyond his duty as a Federal
Judge and is acting as collecting agent
for the holders of fraudulent bonds.
He is usurping power over the persons
If Missouri officers and holding them
n pawn for the payment of fraudu-
ent Chronicle.