electors.

It was very proper to prohibit the issuance of any more of the bonds,
but the provision requiring a vote of the people before those already
out could be paid was practically repudiation, and the state labored
under that damaging stigma for over twenty years. Attempts were made to
obtain the sanction of the people for the payment of these bonds, but
they were defeated, until it became unpleasant to admit that one was a
resident of Minnesota. Whenever the name of Minnesota was heard on the
floor of congress as an applicant for favors, or even for justice, it
was met by the charge of repudiation. This was an era in our history
very much to be regretted, but the state grew steadily in material
wealth.

On March 2, 1881, the legislature passed an act, the general purpose of
which was to adjust, with the consent of the holders, the outstanding
bonds, at the rate of fifty cents on the dollar, and contained the
curious provision that the supreme court should decide whether it must
first be submitted to the people in order to be valid or not, and if the
supreme court should not so decide, then an equal number of the judges
of the district court should act. The supreme court judges declined to
act, and the governor called upon the district court judges to assume
the duty. Before any action was taken by the latter, the attorney
general applied to the supreme court for a writ of prohibition to
prevent them from taking any action. The case was most elaborately
discussed, and the opinion of the supreme court was delivered by Chief
Justice Gilfillan, which is most exhaustive and convincing. The court
holds that the act of 1881 is void, by conferring upon the judiciary
legislative power, and that the amendment to the constitution providing
that no bonds should be paid unless the law authorizing such payment was
first submitted to and adopted by the people was void, as being
repugnant to the clause in the constitution of the United States, that
no state shall pass any law impairing the obligation of contracts. With
these impediments to a just settlement of this question removed, the
state was at liberty to make such arrangements with its bond creditors
as was satisfactory. John S. Pillsbury was governor at that time. He had
always been in favor of paying the bonds, and removing the stain from
the honor of the state, and finding his hands free, it did not take him
long to arrange the whole matter satisfactorily, and to the ap