The Suprerae Court of this State lias uiianiinously dccided the local option law I by the lesislaturc of 1887 unconBtitntional. Tlielr decisión beiug based princlpally upon the title. The law attempting "to accomplisli more than one object under one tille which the constitutiuii cxpressly declares sliall not be done The defect was clearlv nointod out by MdMra. Liiwrente and Wbltman when the iiijunction proceedinjrs were being klfraed before Judfte Kimie in thiscircuil. In some respecta the failurc of the law is to be regretted. Many of the people ot the state were very anxious to learn how ilit' law would work in counties where It liad been tdopted, and whethcr its provlsiona were wise or unwise. No such experience can be gained now, as the time in which the law liad been in operttion tOO sluirt to judge of ita eftecta. Bilt as a rebnke to the hasty aud loose manner of enacting laws by our hir'ü'lature, its effects niay besalutary. Onebalfthe laws- yes, perhaps a fu greatet proportion of them - passed every altérnale year by the lej;islatiire of tlie state, are not wortb the paper they are printed upon. Thev are crude tn form, buiiglinjï in construction and unconstilutioiial in their provisions. What the people need is less legislation and better leislation. Fewer legislators and better legislators. A legiflature composed of ten senators and twenty-five repreaentatives would 'ive us better results by far than tlie unwieldly body that now assemblee biennially to make and unmake our Uws.