A Shameful Position

The Ann Arbor Arffus has given a very mischievous tone to its comments upon the decisión of the United States Supreme Court in the test railroad aid bond caso. In effect it takes the losition that the judgment granted by the United States tribunate should be resistel by the oflicers of the municipalitics affected, and that Uien the duty of the State courts would be to sustain and ro-enforce these officials. A more utterly scnseless and unjustiiiable policy of action could not be devised or urgcd by a man wlio is usually intelligent and accustomed to the exerciso of a reasouably respestable judgmeut. The jurisdiction of thu United States court in the case brought before lt was undoubtedly, and its decree is certain to bo enforced, if there is a default in voluntary obedience, by compulsory procesa, sustained by the ontire power of the national government. The attempt, oven by suggestion, to array a few town ofticers and the courts of the Stato against such a power is disreputable, unpatriotic, and indefensibie. It especially calis tor earnest denunciahon, when its only aim is to defeat, if possible, the paymeut of honest debts, and to continue the postponoinent of the day that erases the stain of reputdiation from the escutcheon of this State. The advice of the Argus is so inanifestly irratioual and dishonorable that wo do not feel apprehensive that it will flnd any follo'wers. The town that should accept it would simply delay the inevitable, and largely and unuecessanly increase the burden of lts costs. The town officers, who should become the instruments of such a policy, would exposé themselves to the danser of severe penalties, and the State courts which should countenance or aid such action would deal mortal blows at their own usefulness and disgrace the American judiciary. Michigan could adopt no more suicidal policy than to alcay hcrsolf in the interest of practical repudiation against a final decisión of the United States Suprome Court, which the whole power, civil and military, of the nation, can be rallied to sustain. The sane man who urges such a course is a bad citizen, and the reputable uewspaper that advocates it is au enemy of the public weal. - Tribune. We still live ! And we have failed to observe that any of our fellow citizens sheer off as they meet us on the streets or look askanoe as if they regarded us as an escaped lunatio or convict. theloss, we confess to a feeling somewhat akin to that expressed by a poor dying sinner, when he said : " I aint afraid to die, I am willing to pass in my ohecks, but then, just to think that after passing 8afely through fire and flood, war, pestilence and fainine, railroad disaster and shipwreck, the inscription on my tomb-stone will be ' kicked to death by a d - d little insignificant, blind and mangy triok mule,' nigh about breaks my heart." There, that may not be a full and legitimate response to the above paragraphs, but then it is as fair and courteous as the Tribune' criticiam upon the " Railroad Aid Bond " editorial in last week's ARGUS. And had our cotomporary given its readers the ARGUS article which is the text of its personal denunoiation, we should have eheerfully submitted to its chastisement in silence. The Argus gave no word of advice to the officers of the municipalitiea affected or to the State courts. The Akgus is not the legal adviser of municipalities or courts. The Argus did, however,' suggest that the iaw or section of the law under which the Tribune proposed to have a tax levied and collected to pay the judginent obtainod, and like judgment, to be obtained, had no application and furnished no authority to supervisor or collector. If the Tribune will point out the warrant for a State Legislature to enact that in any case " no execution shall be awarded or issued " from a United States court, - this case exactly, - we will concede our mistake upon that point. Beyond that suggestion, we reminded the Tribune that by its own confession inferior State courts and all State and local officers, would be bound by the decisión of the State Supreine Court, "whatever the Washington court may decide." With this admission before us, which it has never withdrawn, we suggested that the individual tax payer might contest the sale of his property or the tax titls on his land, in the event of the supervisor and collector proceeding to levy and collect taxes to pay bonds issued under a law held unconstitutional by the highest State court, and queried as to what the State Supreme Court would do in such emergency. We said and repeat, " These are practical questions aiid will boar consideration," and no amount of Tribune clap-trap, or profession of patentpatriotisin, or making wry faces (at one's sister - the resort of worsted bullies), will deter the individual tax payer from a refusal to pay or from contesting the sale of personal property or lands in payment of taxes he believes illegally levied : his regularly constituted and trusted attorney and not the Argus being his adviser. - In this connection we invite attontion to the decisión in question, which will be found in this paper. Having no power of reversal we shall not proceed to review, but remenibering the proverb, "A cat niay look upon a king, we venture to say that it is a very weak decisión, or gives at the least, very poor reasona tor the conclusions of the court. We have little re veren ce for men (we won't say for a court - it might be treasonable) who hold that a railroad is a public highway in such a sense that it uiay be construoted wholly or in part by taxatiou, though owned by, and operated for the benefit and profit of, a private Corporation ; or for men (though they be judges) who will hold that what a State cannot do of itseif, being constitutionally prohibited, it may perinit or coinpel municipalities to do, and in that way build railroads across the State in any and all diroctions ; or for the intelligence of a court (even though it be the Supreme Court of the United States) which speaking of the railroad aid legislation or laws of this State, says that " during the period covered by their entractment, neither of the other departments of the government of the State lifted its voice against thein," thus ignoring the faot that the Governor of the State vetoed several aid laws because of their unconstitutionality before the passage of the general law, and that the constitutionality of the general law was seriously questioned before and after its passage. We presume that the decisión is to be obeyed and the illegally issued bonds paid ; and yot we wish to predict that the day will come when the same court, perhaps not constituted the same, will everse the decisión and hold more in acordance with common sense. - ■ i - - ■■ The two branches of the Connecticut Legislature voted for United States Senator on Tuesday. Wm. W. Eaton received 16 votes in the Senate and 132 in the House. Senator Bückiííoham: had 4 votos in the Senato and 76 in the House. David A. Wells had 1 vote and Jos. R. Hawley, 11 ; all in the House. A joint convention was held on Wednesday and Mr. Eaton declared elected. He is a freetrade and hard-money Democrat, and is a man of good character and great ability. Some of the Republican journals charge that he was a rebel sympathizer, but the N. Y. Jivening Pont - not accustomed to see auything good in a Democrat, eveu though he opposes protection and an elastic shinplaster currency - doesn't take ïuuch stock in the charge. It thinks, however, that the Dernocracy should have elected David A. Wells, wlnle Mr. Wells gupported Eaton.