Southwest-sentinel. [volume] (Silver City, N.M.) 1883-189?, 1895-07-02

qualifications. tho territorial assembly
had general Legislative power TO leg
islato upon an rightful subjects Of leg
lslaiion, not inconsistent With the con.
%stlinlion aud laws Of the United
States tAot Cong. Sept. .. 1851
The power thus given was Of the most
plenary natures aud n would soom
that The legislature did have power
70 pass the act in Question, II the
granting of aid 70 railroads was. 10 q
legal sense. a rightful subject Of leRis-
lation. Upon ihis point TIE decided
proponderance Of authority, state and
national, holds that such aid is for n
public purpose, and within the lawful
exercise Of legislative powOr. unlese
there is some other special clause
OF organic law prohibiting II. The
disastrous consequences which have
followed from the recognition BY the
courts Of such a wide scope to legisla-
tive power have been often deplored,
but it may be considered now as firm
y settled. Loan Association vs. To-
peka, 20 Wallace 055. 002; I Dillon,
Munc. Corp. Sec. sos. Indeediit was
upon the theory Of the public
purpose OF railroads that III g supreme
court Of the United States in the So
called Granger cases. IN revie wing the
legislation IN Iowa. illinois. Wisconsin
and Minnesota held that HE state lee
ialatures had power to regulate the
rate Of ireIghts and fares to DO oharged
for railroad transportation. tSoo cascs
reported 10 o. u. S. Rep
However this may be, Ia 1873, con
gress passes 40 act June 8, 1878. 20 U.
8. State. at Large lOi) which contained
those words: "But nothing herein
shall have tho effect to create any
private right, except that o. holding
and executing municipal offices. or to
divest any cuch right. or 10 make
valid or invalid any contract or obi
cation heretofore made by or on behalf
OF any town, city or other municipal
corporation 20 incur hereafter aay
dcbt or obligation other than shall Be
necessary TO he administration Of is
internal q6d5rs." This act was passed
nearly Eve years before the issue OF
the bonds in question.
The supreme court Of the United
States has recently construed this act
Of congress IN Lewis vs.. Pima Co. (de-
cided at October term 1s94,) and held
that the clause operated as a prohibi-
ton upon territorial legislatures 70
authorize counties to issao bonds 10
the aid Of the construction Of rail.
roads. The court, per Mr.. Justice
Brown, say. "tBy internal Affairs Of
q municipal corporation 10 Q Q admin.
itra,ion Of Viii b the legislature could
alone authorize Il to incur q debt Wal
undoubtedly intended such busine /
an municipalities Of like character are
usually required to engage In to full.
I'LL their proper functions, and 70 ef-
f~ectuato the objects Of their char
ters. In the cases Of counties these
are ordinarily to provide 9 cOurI
house for the administration Of JUS
tics; q Jail for the confinement Of
prisoners; E pOor-house for the sus-
tenanco Of paupers (where BY l0oa'
laws they are made chargeable upon
the county,; officers for various Of
hciAis Of the county; and, under Ger
tain circumstances, highways and
bridges for she accommodation Of The
public. IL could W. have beet
contemplated, however, that this pow
or would be used 20 Incur obliga
tions 10 favor Of q railroad operated
BY q private corporation for private
gain, though also subserYing a public
purpose" This decision By the ga
prome court Of the United States \
one which Il ia the duty OF this c0uf
to follow, unless there is seine fact n
element In this caso which viii way.
rant q different conclusion. None ban
been pointed out by degondants' solici
tor and the court fails 70 observe ina
there Is any. The demurrer ns 20 th'
third ground Will, therefore, DO over
ruled.
4th. The only remaining quoslio,
IL as 20 whether the bin shows an.
equity.
II is quite true that tho more lie
gality or uncOnetitutlonality Of q ~
will not be sufficient 10 give equit,
Jurisdiction. Standby ". Albany Co.
,ll2i, II. s.. $685. Alton vs.. Pullman Pei
Car Co, 100, ". 3. COS; .Ex parte Tyler
i40, u. s. 104-l0i; unless In addition
the bill shows . case falling Withil
some acknowledged head Of equit
Jurisdiction, such "a the prevention o
} a multiplicity Of suits, i~rreparable In.
, Jury, cloud upon title and the like.
Dillon, Hun. Corp. Sec. o23; Shelton VI
: Plat, 1870, u. s. 60i. This bill exhib
its such distinct grounds Of equity
PomerOy oq. Dur. Secs. 800, 200-270
ga. The fourth ground Of the demur
rer Is likewise Insufficient, aud iB over
ruled. The question as 20 the RICH.
OF bona fde holders Of the bonds j
. question has not and cannot be raise
BY the defendants who have demurr0s
2 and no opinion need, therefore, b