A "constitushunal Lawyer" Unearthed

Anti Arbor eviilently has a great "constitusliunal" luwyer hitherto unknown Ín the person of the editor of the Árgo What he d.m't know about the coiisütu tions of Missachu-tetts, Peimsylvanin, the ludían Territory et al is not worth knowIng. We would like to ask why not one qoutation fiom Mickigan or Uuited Stiltes decisions s Lven to bolster up bis eiuse ? Tliey would kave welght not applylnir to those ofcourts which bave no jurisdictiou kere. As to tke opinión of Judge Cooley it is to be remembered tkat on these sub jects, Judge Cooley and tke United States Supreine court are not agreed. Tke Argus aekuowledges that tke supreine court rules "ihat rail roads are public and mmiey raised for theni Is not ruised for priva; purposi's." Judge Cooley did not so rule. Uuder hit ilecision our nelghbor iiifr city ol Fptilaatl reimdlated its bonds. Uuder tlie decisión ot the U. S. Supreme court, Ypsilauti still enjoya the privilege of paying its houest debts. We quote fiom tlie Ai;us: "It is, we take lt, elementary law that one cltlzeu rannot be taxed for tlie purpixie of aldlnganothercltlzen's bU8lue8. If he deslros to no con tribu te well iiqu (jood. but lf he U not wllllng tl.ere Ís no law whlch wlll conipel lilm tolloso." Now has this editor ever heard of a protective taril)'? Viewed narrowly it is just whiit the quotatlon embraces. Yet Ís so popular tlmt tke niajoiity of oue grcnt political party upholds it as one ol' its fundamenta] doctrines and so popular also, that the other grent politiual party daré not attemd its repeai. Viewed broadly it is tor the public good. And Whlle thcpmposed city tax may be velwed by a narrow ininded man as nbove, elsewkire similar measures have btcome more popular, the more thuy have been triid. A few yeara ajfo tliere was In Owosso, a vacant iract of laud paylng practically nothtag iuto the public purse. A boiius (we believe $2,000) was given to acasket factory to come and build its manufactory Ol) tbut f round. That factory now pays taxes to the amount of $1,000 per year. Suppose we take a period of ten years the tax aniounts to $10,000 while the bonus was $2.000. The result ia clear, a Det jiain ol $8,000 for the town, now was tlmt tnx tor the benefit ot a private concern alone or hus it paid tke city, and eveiy tax payer io it foui-fold? This too without Jiicluding ld tke calculation the increase in tke value of all property which such an establishmeiit briugs. n me Ai-gua lias i case, wh.it ís llio use of lying about the matter ! Why doe It say thiU -'Howell lias been torced to lose theT., A. A. &, N. M. K. U. 8hop8 because she could uot lejjally mise tlie re qulred bonus by tuxation."? No proposition lias ever been made to Howell by the H. H. amliorities, as they have al! along desijílied that Owosso Bliould have the ahoptt. And Owosso evideiuly has the leaal power to raise $25,000 by bonUing the city for tncvhops t-lse she woulil not have bo vuted 011 Honday ot the curreiit week. The Ar;us descrveis to become the oflidu oigan (.1 the Knighl's of lieet and all Dther uiossbaeks, but even these will not ipüold it in lal,chood. The provisión of Im charter is plain on this subject. Let litu wbo will read it on are 24 of the irdlnanow as published in 1882, and de:ide for hiiiHcir. There i no question ibotit the matter, as the vote on Friday vill determine.