The court adheres to the decision of the Supreme Court of
Illinois declaring that the provision in the existing constitution
of that state, entitled "Municipal subscriptions to railroads or
private corporations," took effect July 2, 1870.
This was an action brought by Wade against the Town of Walnut
upon coupons cut from bonds purporting to be issued by the
defendant, under the style of Township of Walnut, in the County of
Bureau and Illinois. The declaration avers that each of the bonds
contains, among other recitals, the following:
"This bond is issued under and by virtue of the charter of said
Illinois Grand Trunk Railway Company, and amendments thereto and
other laws of the Illinois, and in accordance with the vote of the
electors of said township at the special election held August 6,
1870, in accordance with said charter and amendments and laws."
The defendant demurred to the declaration, and judgment was
rendered in its favor. It is unnecessary to state the remaining
facts, as the only question upon which this Court passed was as to
whether, at the foregoing date, there was in
Page 105 U. S. 2
force an article of the Constitution of Illinois which is as
follows:
"No county, city, town, township, or other municipality shall
ever become subscriber to the capital stock of any railroad or
private corporation, or make donation to, or loan its credit in aid
of such corporation,
provided, however, that the adoption
of this article shall not be construed as affecting the right of
any such municipality to make such subscriptions where the same
have been authorized, under existing laws, by a vote of the people
of such municipalities prior to such adoption."
Wade sued out this writ of error.
MR. CHIEF JUSTICE WAITE delivered the opinion of the Court.
The only question we have to decide in this case is whether the
section of the Illinois Constitution adopted in 1870 relating to
"municipal subscriptions to railroads or private corporations" was
in force on the 6th of August, 1870. This question came before the
supreme court of the state at the January Term, 1872, only eighteen
months after the constitution was adopted, in
Schall v.
Bowman, 62 Ill. 321, and it was then decided that this section
took effect on the 2d of July, the day the people voted for its
adoption. The opinion in the case was written by Mr. Justice
Breese, two justices dissenting. At the September Term in the same
year, the same questions came again before the court in
Richards v. Donagho, 66 Ill. 73, and the opinion was then
delivered by Mr. Justice Thornton in the following words:
"The only question presented by this record was, after mature
deliberation, settled by the opinion in
Schall v. Bowman.
. . . Notwithstanding the able and plausible argument made in this
case, the majority of the court adhere to the opinion in the case
referred to above."
Afterwards at the January Term, 1878, in
Wright v.
Bishop, 88 Ill. 302, the court said:
"Appellants make a very able and
Page 105 U. S. 3
interesting argument against the rulings in those cases, but we
are not convinced they should be overruled."
This Court has never until now been called on to decide the
question, but in numerous cases it has assumed that the section
took effect on the day fixed by the supreme court of the state.
Town of Concord v. Portsmouth Savings Bank, 92 U. S.
625;
County of Moultrie v. Rockingham Ten-cent
Savings Bank, 92 U. S. 631;
County of Randolph v. Post, 93 U. S.
502;
Fairfield v. County of Gallatin,
100 U. S. 47;
Walnut v. Wade, 103 U. S. 683;
Louisville v. Savings Bank, 104 U.
S. 469. Under these circumstances, we are not inclined
to consider the question an open one here while the supreme court
of the state adheres to its present rulings.
Judgment affirmed.