Legislative Dictators

Being natural-born blunderers or interrueddlers, or incited thereto by vicioua outside iutriguers and partisans, - we neither know nor caro which, - cortain members of the Legislature are reported as having assumed the humble role of petitioners to the Board of Begents of the Univorsity. Thepetition, said to be the offspring of a legislative cauous, - Speaker Bioh being one of the draftiug committee, - and to have been nuineroualy signed, modestly prays : J. That tbe Begents oonvene in special sossion at their earliest convenience. 2. That when convened they re-instate Dr. Rose in his old position in the laboratory. 3. That they rei'nnd to him $850, which they seem to assuino that he paid over to the Univorsity, about the time the dafioiencies were discovered, under at least a semi-conipulsion ; and, 4. That they order a withdrawal of the chancery suit broaght against Dr. Bose (in connootion with Dr. Douglas), and now pending, making Douglas sole defendant. And this after a long and exponsive invostigation, set on foot for the nominal purpose of furnishing information to aid intelligent legislators, but really, - as shown by its methods of pursuit, by the thoroughly pettifogging argument of the report, by the one-sided and sometimos lame conclusions, and by the action under discussion, - in the interest of partios outside of the Uuiversity. This, too, in the face of a report which still leaves a portion of the missing funds in the hands of Dr. Bose. This, too, in the faoo of the well.known fact that the report of a legislativo eommittee is not in the nature of a deoision or deoree of a court of law or equity, and binds nobody to restore and pay over the missing moneys. This, too, in faoo of the fact that nothing but the decisión or decree of a court, probably of the court of last resort, will be final in any sense, satisfy the public, and compel restitution. The bare statement of these points is sufficient to show the absurdity of the proceeding, and also to raise the presumption that the movers in the matter havo not the utmost conñdence that the verdict or decree of a court would correspond with the conolusions of the oommittee. A suit in chancery, equally iniplicating Drs. Douglas and Bose, is a proceeding that will dispose of every issue at one and the same time, and make a final end of it. If such a decree shall be against Dr. Douglas for the whole aaiount, Dr. Bose will go out of court honorably and triumphantly acquitted, If it shall find a portion of the moneys in the hands of each, each will be held accordingly. Withdraw the suit, proceed against Dr. Douglas, get a decree against him for but a portion, - not an irupossible result, - and a uew suit against Dr. Bose would theh be necessary, involving extra expense and delay, where expense and delay havo already been too great. The suit as now pending, uuder the amended bill, should have been brought fifteen months ago, - at the very date disagreement aróse between Dr. Douglas and Dr. Boso as to the possession of and responsibility for the moneys not turued over to tho TJaiversity, - and it should now be prosecuted to the earliest termiuation. It will not do for the legislators who thus assume to hold a club - the club of no appropriations - over the Begents, to allego want of confidence in the courts. The party the legislativa majority represent bas every member of tho Supremo Court, has butrecently solemnly declared their ability and purity, and has just nominated, and the people have re-elccted the chief-justice by such a majority as must be considered a vote of confidence. Besides, it should have suggosted itself to these officious legislators that the Begents are a constitutional body, responsible under their oaths to the people, and not to the Legislature, and that a threat disguised as a petition is a species of bull-dozing not within the constitutional prerogative of the Legislature. It can control the outgoings f rom the State treasury, or condition the appropriatiens it may make, either wisely or foolishly, - there is no oonstitutional guarantee of legislativo wisdom or against legislativo folly, - but it must not usurp the powors of tho Begents. "When it shall do that, either directly or indirectly, the doors of the University will be sealed, - the bogiuning of the end will be at hand. - A groat deal has been aaid here and there about a " Uuiversity Ring," a " Mutual Admiration Society," etc., but we may be permitted to suggest to the knot or " ring" - whether local or denominational -which seems bent on rule or ruin, that responsibility for the failure of nocossary appropriations will be brandcd upon their foreheads, and that the sober second thought of the well-wishing, honest, and genuine friends of the University, - not belonging either to a Douglas or Beal-Bose " ring," and wearing no mau's collar, - will sooner or later compel thera to hide their heads in shame. We would also suggest to the members of the dominant party in the Lcgislaturo to read anew and carefully, the resolution of the late State Conveution, and to the minority members that the University was founded, cherished, and brought through adversity to prosperity by the Democratie fathera of the State, that undor Democratie control no stain ever rosted upon its good name, and that it is their duty to ignore all personal jealousios and considerations, and give their influonco and votes to further build up and magnify the University, - to so vote that it shall not be made the foot-ball of either donominational, partisan, or legislativo demagogues. The New York Court of Appoals has announced a very important decisión : that is that the board of exeise of New York City " have no power at law to grant licenses to persons other than keepers of inns, taverns, or hotels, to geil strong and spirituous liquors aud wine to be drunk on the preinises." The temperance peoplo threaten immodiate prosecution of tho hundrods and thousands of saloon koepers holding licenses whioh are illegal and will allord tu uw iio protection.