Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE DAILY SUN Office in the Sun Building, West fide qf Broad fired. Second Door South ttf Alabama, New Advertisement* always found on First Page; Local and Business Notices on Fourth Page. politioal prospects! Cannot hoaoot m< n, throughout the land, be brought together upon a common platform of honesty In politics, as well iu» in dollars and cento? There are important movements ju; ahead! Cato. Mr. Stephen* and “Law and Order.” We publish in full, the decisions of the Supreme Court; also the daily “Pro- ©endings” of the Court, and keep the “Order of Business” standing in our eolunraa. _ *f I Agesu f«rTli« >■■) Thomas N Honan, Thomsavtllo. Ga. jAUm ALUl Burra, Knoxville, Teuu. DAT* Bill, Athena. (H. Jon T. Bodkbts, Atlanta. Oa J. L. Weight, Woodstock, Ga. J. Q. Ca*i»weix, Thomson, Ga. H. a Kamil tom, Dalton, Ga. W. a Dana. Jr., Xatoaton, Ga TArran, Karr k Co., WhIt* Plains. Green Co., Oa J. L. hOTB, Chattanooga, Tenn. J. C. Pahram, LaGrange, Ga, U. A. Taehxdob. TbomMvlllo. Ga. X, O. William*, Union Point Change of Osar Subscription Price We uk attention to onr new term* of •ubscrfption in the flret column on our it* ■—e. •lmataC.pt.. of Ik. ■» K.r f.le ml tlu Osaalcr. DAILY... • Cent* WEEKLY Thursday Morktbo 8etthb«b 28. CatoH Letter. We cell the attention of our readers to day specially to the letter of Cato, from Washington. The disclosures he makes are of a very important character. Wo have personally no knowledge of the facts ■feted by him. but from our knowledge of 4 the writer, we take it for granted that he feels well assured of being able to sus tain by proof all his allegations! It is with onr oonftdenoe in hia judgment, in tegrity and aenae of justice in this par ticular, that we give his letter to the pub lic. It is certuinly time for the honest masses of the people, the toiling tax pay ers everywhere, duly to oonsider whether they are being diiftted by the corrupt ring of political tricksters, into whose hands they have fallen. A. H. 8. Tc-day wo lay before our readers the following correspondence, in which they may take some interest. It is copied from the Constitutionalist, of Augusta, Oa. The letter of ‘ Law and Order,” ad dressed to Mr. Stephens, apjieared in that paper of the 21st inst. Hia response appeared in the suwc paper of the 34th, We shall continue the republication of this correspondence in The Sun, as it progresses. It is directly upon the vital issues of the day: From the Augusta (Ga.) Constitutionalist, September Slat. 1872. To lion. A. H. Stephens: Dear Hir— You will doubtless pardon the liberty the writer proposes to take, of address ing you through the medium of the press, when he aunts you that, though he has not always concurred with you in politi- cal sentiment or action, lie lias neverthe less been a constant admirer of your gr*at genius and power and patriotism for many years—indeed, ever since he first heard you on the hustings at Spring Hill in Richmond county, when you were a younger man by thirty years than you now are. Be assured, my dear sir, thai nothing short of a profound conviction that the role you are now performing in the drama of our national politics must result in serious detriment to Southern interests, by preventing Democratic su with you, and you and they will have for your compensation the reflection that you defeated your party and gave a new lease of power to Radicalism, liy per sistence in an unwise policy, alreauy con demned by the people, you will at least establish, beyond question, your right to be called Bourbons, since it was one of their peculiarities “never to learn any thing.” Your course, sir, in view of your conservative antecedents, has much astonished and pained the people. The Democracy are surprised to And one of your usual caution and forecast lea-ling sion, when the voice of reason was hushed in the impending fury of the hour. You both did your whole duty heroically to the Southern cause, while it struggled in vain for independence, aud wL< :» the struggle was ended, you were both regarded by your people as “Great men Htmggl.ug iu t'»c storm* <>f fate, And greatly falling with a fulling State.” That you both have acted conscien tiously in the course you have respec tively pursued since the war, is not ques tioned. That you and all other Southern men and politicians who acted with you the van of a bitter assault upon your own just before the war, have acted outside of premacy in the Union for years to come, could induce the writer to suggest ob jections to the political course ot a man like yourself, who is more endeared to the people by the goodness of his large heart than by the admitted brilliancy and grasp of his intellect. No man cun escape the v-onsequenees of his own prominence. One of these oonsequene.es is his liability to public criticism. You, sir, have won your way to the front rank of statesmen in this country. From this elevated stand point you could calmly defy a party malignity which sought by means of the Htn amendment to consign you to powerless Won]* of encouragement greet us from every quarter—not only in ap proving letters from nearly every State in the Union, fyft ift long lists of sub- uoribers daily received. We have the strongest evidence that the of the people eveiy where are in earnest, and that there is "life iu the old land yet." party friends who differ in opinion from you touching the true p >licy of the party at this time concerning the amendments --a time when they are engaged in a deadly struggle to defeat the enemies of the Constitution and the country, and they are forced to exclaim, “J9Itu Bruit'!" They cannot see, as you do, that Andrew Johnson, as President, had the right to call us in convention and require the abol ishment of slavery, and because we con sented to it, it was, therefore, constitu tionally and rightfully abolished. They can’t perceive that the reconstruction of Andrew Johnson as President is one whit less a usurpation than that of the Con gress; indeed, it is most plain to them that he had no power in the premises whatever. They cannot see, as you do, how they can upon principle accept the situation as to the 13th amendment, and refuse to do it os to the 14tb and 15th. — Their idea is, that all were alike the off spring of usurpatory and unjust interfer ence with the righto of the sovereign States. Yet they nave l>een adopted in a method acceptable to the powers that be, aud have been proclaimed anil ever since acted upon and recognized as parts of the Constitution. Instead of the peo ple being counselled to nullify them by the mere election of a President pledged to ignore them, their opinion is that the people should everywhere recognize and obey them until they themselves see proper, in a legitimate way, to repeal or moaify them. The people alone have jurisdiction of this question. You are not understood to hold that the Federal Government at the close of the war had the cdKstitution- al right to compel the abolishment of slavery. If not, could your mere accp- tauce of the wrong make it right, nor yet would the acceptance by a “constitution al constituency” give it the wanting elc- aEffiry. v.',.”." — “» tirement than all jour peraecutora, aud recognise and indorse this reasoning would have wielded as a retired sage an " WASHINGTON OORHESPON- DENCE. Letter fro Ml Cato. Startling Disclosures. WASBnroTow, September 22, 1871. The publio press in this city sociuh to be in a curious condition. I except the Sunday papers, and a morning ami eve ning prnnella, for the reason that I never 4oe any of them. The Chronicle was es tablished during the war, by that incom parable patriot, “Colonel” John W. Forney. He made it pay'handsomely dnring the Presidency of tbo “Martyr.” Subsequently, howovor, somohow the cash Account exhibited a prepondcronco of big flgnres on tbo wrong side, and ho magnauimoualy sold out to an at- oh J of the Senate, (a Mr. Mouis), who forth* ith showed his teeth in an anti Orant direction. It was one of the won ders of the world hereabouts at the time where the purchase money Came from; if, indeed, it were not merely nominal. No one impeded Mr. Sumner, nor Mr. Carl Sobara, nor Mr. Trumbull, nor any of the other expectants of the next Demo cratic uomiuatioii for tbo Presidency, of contributing a red oent, Iu the t’-st plant', they are sll too pure, holiest, and abovc-aboord, to think of such a tl ug. Iu the second piaoe, they are all parsi monious to a proverb; mid thirdly, and lastly, nod oonclusivelj. thoy are known to lie as poor as snakes in March. Under these circumstances, it was with mors woadsr still, (if wonders may he said to have degrees of comparison), that the public read a recent announcement that the Chronicle had passed into the hands ot that other huge patriot, ex- OorsODer Holden, of North Carolina I— When this worthy son ot the South, (who, if my reoolleotion serves, was one of the “original" secessionists), came t > this city, he was minus the dimes to pay his way comfortably. He paid a viait to New York, andy tuitn lime seeured a suf ficiency of money to get Morris out of hie pecuniar y scrape I I have it from a good source that his feigned loyrity, how ever dexterously put in market, has failed utterly to affect him of the cigar! Hut, where did the money come from f This has become a National question of the gravest importance. It ia known that Tweed, Connelly A Co., established the Patriot newspaper in this city, under reetridioiu as iu id jnUitical course. It is an acknowledged stipendiary of those sharpers, and at any moment may lie stopped at their behest. How mildly the Patriot deals, therefore, with these ras cals f For every dollar they stole, bodi ly, it shows a counter dollar stolen by the other wing of the same financial oonfed- «raoj—but not a woid of condemns lion This washing of one hand with the other, ia not an invention of the Tamma ny Bing. Hut the eabsidising of public presses upon both sides it.' And now, probably comes in the information that 1 am enabled to give in this very import ant letter. It ia that IlMen got Ms money fo nek*. Me CAroni- eI* from the Radical ailjuncd qf the Democratic Tammany King. So we see that the Metropolitan press employed |) abase and recriminate each other, and thereby throw dost in the eves of the publio, are owned by one and the same Indy of man, who, for conveaieooe rake, divide themselves into Demoetaii^ad Badioal coteries, the better tp fleooe the country of millions upon millions. The eamraon ground spun which those vil lains meet ia the "New Departure,” a molt superlative humbug, designed from the beguining to cover up frauds, politi cally fundamental aud fundamentally fraudulent and felonious. I hope these truthful and alarming disclosure*—none ot the implicated parties will dare deny them—may have sone weight with the thinking men all over the country. No man can be called honest in s pecuniary sense, v;ho proposes to avail himself of .’•■and and knavery in furthe-ing iu influence more poUint than all their un patriotic and anti-Bepublican machina tions combined. This would have been a triumph worthy of yonr post record.— Those who love Republican principles aud institutions (and four-fifths of tbo American people are still devoutly at tached to them) would ever have listened with deep respect to the utterances from “Liberty Hull,” and if the effect should uut have been as immediate as on ardent patriotism could desire; yet like bread cost on the waters the return would hove been certain after many days. Sir, have you not lowered your crest iu quitting the exalted position of a retired political sago and statesman which was so univer sally accorded to you tnat even the North ern press, without distinction of party, copied idl your outgivings on important public questions, to mingle in the petty strife of tbo daily press 1 That your motives oro pure and your purposes patriotic, no one will a moment doubt, and still, as Homer main some times, the course you aeem to have marked out for yourself in the present juncture of affairs may not bo the wit ei * and best for all that! Tbo pnrpc then, of this Jotter, or perhaps letters (for I find I shall not say all 1 wish lo iu ouo letter,) is to show, first, that your policy is wrong under all our summin'- iuga, aud not in accord w’tli your action and policy on other important questions ill which you ti ok conspicuous part. Aud secondly, - to appcol to you, by your past record and yom patriotism to desist from your war on political friends, who, while they cannot agree with your pres ent policy aud views, nevertheless desire to tw earnest oo-lal>ororu with you in all well-timed and judicious efforts iu he hall of constitutional liberty. Hinoo you have become editor, yoi have impressed the public mind with the cuuviction that yon hove assumed as your special mission the defeat of what you are pleased to atyle “New Departure.” When it is remembered that the New Departure, properly oud truthfully por trayed, simply represents a prudent pol icy" deemed essential to the future tri umph of the great Democratic party of the nation,and is sanctioned by the ablest, purest aud wisest of its leaders, and heartily susbiiued, os it ia believed, by the almost unanimous voice of the Nntioual Democracy of the North, it Cl but bo confessed von have taken upon yourself a Horculiun task. \\ bile this may indicate both yonr sincerity of viction, and your coufideuco in yonr own power to crush wlint you couocivo to be an orrer, it must nevertheless pro voke surprise and chagrin that so illustri ous a foonian should be willing to thrust his glittering steel at the heart* of his own frieuds, and seek to spill their blood. Wuat, then, is this polioy of the New Departure, of which you are so unsparingly denunciatory, and that causes you to per secute it* friends even unto strange citios? Let the question be unswerod first by showing what it is not. Aud first, it is not what it is so often stated to lie in Tire Atlanta Bun—“a new name for Radical ism”—nor ia it a pretext for sliding into the Republican party, as you often insin uate, it you do not distinctly charge it. Nor yet is it on endorsement or approval of the principles and policy of the Radi cal party, which resulted in tho adoption of the [fourteenth and fifteenth amend- incuts and the unconstitutional laws. Tho Departurists, so-called, neither ap prove nor endorse as constitutionally adopted, even though a compliance with form aud manuers may have been hud, auy of the recent amendments, including the tbbteentli. Still they accept them all as accomplished fact*, as proclaimed aud recognised part* of the organio law, and sav they are to continue to lie recog- uized and obeyed until tho people, who alone hava the power, see proper, in a legitimate way, to repeal them. The thirteenth will uever he disturbed, since it was most solemnly acquiesced in and agreed to by the whites, the masters and owner* at the time of its presentation to the Southern States for their acceptance and for the additional reason that the in stitution of slavery could nevor again be desirable in the South. The fourteenth and fifteenth amendment* have also been added, ns jtho Now,Departuri»ta conceive, in violution of the spirit of tho Coustitu- tion. Still they have been Uiu* addl'd, anil there is now no escape from obedience to them. Bat you say, this ia a departure from tho platform of tbe pai ty in 1868. Grant it Bat that platform \>iw ao ex treme in it* deinamU that tbo author of tho Broad head letter, which letter caused the insertion of tho weakest plank in it, has since, with hia own hands, ripped it up and thrown it aside. General Bhur and the party tried that plonk thorough ly, and found it would not do. and henoe discarded it as an element of mischief, and tending ooly to unite the enemies of the true Democratic theory of govern ment. If you [lerhist in Htauding on it still, its capucit- may prove ample to hold the minority who will stand there when applied to the fourteenth and fif teenth amendments, as is evident from the frequency with which you quete the Swayze speech” of your brother, Judge Step iens. With his characteristic terse- neaaand nervo is force lie asks, “Does the acceptance of a lie make it the truth?” I answer, No, never 1 But to deny the ex istence of the lie ns an accomplished fact is, if not in itself an untruth, at least a most untenable absurdity. But again, if a fraund upon your rights of property was enacted, and without the shadow of constitutional right, when you were com pelled to accept the emancipation of your slaves, tell us of your acceptance of it by u “constitutional constituency,” or otherwise, was equivalent to an endorse ment of the policy and tho modus ope rand! ? If yes, thou indeed are you con sistent in saying that those who now ac cept tho fourteenth and fifteenth amend ments as parts of the organio law to be obeyed until repealed necessarily endorse their policy ana the modus ot their adop tion. But if no, then indeed is your logic lame, though you bo ft sound logician. That you should be bo confident of the orreotneHs of your own positions, and ho distrustful, if not iutollerant, of the views of others, can but excite comment, in view of some few prominent mistakes of judgment occurring in your political history, which have not eutiivly faded from tlio memory of your constituents. You sustained the policy of the Missouri restriction iu your bold advocacy of the compromise measures of 1850, and you even found iu your support of it consti tutional authority for Congress to ex elude slavery from o ic half of-the Ter ritories of the nation—upon the princi ple of fair divisiou, as you said. You thought, and so declared that these measures would give peace and .iniet to the country. But they did not; and afterward you found it neces sary to incorporate iu the Kansas-Nebras- ka bill the popular sovereignty features. And this you ardently proclaimed os tbe balm for all our woes flowing from the slavery agitation upon every new acqui sition of territory. This was to be the mugio wand which should ever after give repose to tho public mind on this trou blesome question. But did it do it ? I leave the dismantled, impoverished, aud oppressed South to answer. Later when wo had seceded, and the Government of the Confederate States had been set up at Montgomery, you uttered, iu your fa mous “Corner stone” speech, the decided opiniou that the “corner stone” of the new Government was in tho recognition of the idea of the slavery, the subordina tion, of tho negro, the inferior race;” and you said that the United States Govern ment, having failed to discover this great “physical, philosophical aud moral truth, fell when tho storm came and tho wind blew.” And you confidently predicted a glorious future and inevitable perpetuity for the young government os a logical se quence of this well selected principle as its corner stone 1 While all Southern heirts sympathize with you in the sad reooUeotiou of tho perished hopes and prospects of that memorable era, it would perhaps be noedleas, if not unkind, to ask you whore is the corner stone now ? Other errors of judgment you have committed, and on important questions and occasions; but none of these are re ferred to iu a censorious spirit. Far, far from it; but with the sole object to in voke at your hands a more charitable es timate of the opinious of others, who, if they should prove to bo wrojg in their judgments, would nevertheless claim (as you doubtless do and can in reference to your mistakes) that they were honestly mistaken. Tnere are some few men, sir, in the world who, by the very glare aud brilliancy of their superior minds, dazzle us to admiration, while their bold and “uureigned ambition” tills us with fear. Such au oue is your distinguished corn- peer aud neighbor, who is a Hercules in intellect and a very Boanerges of indis crctiou. You, with all the powers of a full grown mental manhood have not been wanting heretofore in that essential ele ment of a truly great man, and you are therefore installed in the popular heart Pardon mo, if I again suggest that when such a man seems to have lost sight of prudential ballast, and lends his power ful influence (unwittingly, of course) to the widening of the breach between the Northern aud Southern States by inten sifying the feelings of estrangement pro duced by the late conflict of the arms, it will produce regrets which, if rcspectfu 1 - ly silent, will be in fact none tho less keenly felt Let me warn you, air, not to mistake respectful forbearance for acquiescence or endorsement. The Democracy neither acquiesces in nor ap prove* of your extreme policy. When the war cloL Xi and tho flag of the Confederacy was furled, the people of tho State looked more particularly to you and to Herschel V. Johnson to guide them out of the surrounding ruin to a poaition of safety and repose. You both had led the opixwition to secession, and had only surrendered to tho voice of pao- your legitimate role, is quite as manifest. Where secession failed, without gratifi cation, which, as true sods of the South pou could not feel, yet with a just regard 'or your antecedent position of devotion to the Union and redress of wrongs in side of it as Douglass Democrats, you could and should liave led in favor of ac quiescence, in obedience to the laws and government of the ruling authorities of the nation. This course, adopted by the Union men and Douglass Democracy of the South would have restored quiet at home, disarmed Northern enmity and sus picion and resulted in a speedy recon struction, which would have been unmar red by any of the offensive and uncon stitutional legislation and policy which now embarrass and insult the Southern people. Neither extreme and ultra posi tions on the one hand, and sullen silence on the other, become men occupying your's and Governor Johnson’s positions in a trying emergency like the present. Law and Order. From tbe August* (G*.) Con*tltution»li*t. September •nth, 1871. Liberty Hall, CllAWFORDVILLE, Ga. 22d September, 1871. To the Editor of the Constitutionalists. Dear Sir: In the issue of your paper of yesterday appeared a letter addressed to me, over the signature of “ Law and Order," which unquestionably deserves, though it may not i>ositively require, a response from me. You will, therefore, I trust, extend the courtesy of allow ing me to make such reply as I deem pro per, through the medium of your col umns. The writ r of the communication re ferred to is certainly laboring under quite as great a mistake in relation to the sub ject of the “New Departure,” and the objects aimed at by it, as he is in relation to those “few prominent mistakes of judgment occurring” in my public life to which he specially alludes, though in “no censorious spirit.” It may be proper first to set him right in matters of fact toi ;hiDg those “mis takes of judgment” on my part, mention ed by him, and then set him right in like matters of fact in regard to the “New De parture." 1. This writer says to me, that I “sus tained the policy of the Missouri restric tion in (my) bold advocacy of the com promise measures of 1850;" and that I found in my “support of it constitutional authority for Congress to exclude slavery from one-half of the Territories of the nation—upon the principle of a fair divis ion, os (I) said.” Now “Law and Order” will pardon mo for saying to him, that he himself is greatly mistaken in this matter. The compromise measures of 1850, which I so boldly advocated, “had no restriction whatever upon slavery, or evolution of it, from any portion of the Territories of the United States, (ns I should say, and not the Notion—as this writer designates tho Union of tl cse States), and could not, therefore, have been advocated by me, on any such grounds or principle as he secniH to suppose. 2. This writer says that I afterwards “found it nocersary to incorporate in the Kansas-Nebraska Bill the ‘popular sove reignty’ features." To this charge of “mistake in judgment” I need only mind “Law aud Oruer” that no new popu lar sovereignty features were incorporated in the Kausas-Nebraska Bill—that meas ure did nothing but carry out in good faith—iu letter and spirV—the principle ot Federal legislation over the Territo ries of the Union, which was established in 1850. 3. This writer is equally mistaken him self in what he says about tho “Corner Stone” speech. That speech clearly set forth that there was no difference be tween the Constitutions of the United States and Confederate States, so far as the ^subordination" of tho African race was concerned, the same “cornor stone" was in each. Whatever “strong hopes” for “peaoe and quiet,” resulting from the principle established in 1850, and carried out in the Kansas-Nebraska Bill in 1854, were ever expressed by me, “Lnc and Older" should recollect that they were announced with the distinct and emphatic declaration that they were founded entirely upon the express con dition that the territorial principle ostab fished in 1850 should be adhered to, and not “departed” from. This tho record abundantly shows. If this principle was afterwards* “departed" from, either by the North or South, I was certainly in no way responsible for either tho ^depar ture" or its consequences. Moreover, howover atro jgly I may have expressed my hopes for the success of the cause of secession, after it was resorted to as a mode of redress against the breach of faith on the part of certain Northern States of the Federal Uniou, yet iu that same “Corner Stone” speech the grounds upon which those hones rested are express ly and cloarly stated, and if there was a “departure" from those grounds, I am certainly in no way responsible for it, nor justly chargeable, as far as I can perceive, with a “mistake in judgment” in the en- tertainme it of the hopes expressed, and as expressed. So much for my past “mistakes in judgment” referred to. Now, as to the “New Departure," called. Either I am, or “Lawaiui Older” is greatly nvstaken “in judgment,” not only as to its character, but as to its aims and objects. My opposition to it arises from a very different understanding of its nature and meaning from that entertained by “Law aud Order.** He seems to think that it does not mean to approve or indorse in any way the “fraudulent amendments." Now, I say to him briefly, and in all frankness, that whenever the authors and concocters, as well as all supporters, of this movement shall sav in plain terms that they do not moan by it to affirm that the 14th and 15th amendments have been constitution ally adopted, and are therefore not “framl- ulent" but rightful parts of the organio law of the Union—not hereafter to be assailed or qvestioned—then my opposi tion to it will cea: 3. No one is less disposed to make war upon friends of any sort than I am; but, in this instanoe, I think, if “Law and Orthr" will take pains to inform himself a little better, be will find that I am not firing upou political friends when I fire upon tho authors of this movement, or its objects; unless he considers those as political friends whose policy is to get the general approval and sanction of the Democracy of the Union of the riglfui- hcss of tho most flagitious usurpations of power in tho history of representative Government ! Usurpations openly avowed by the perpetrators of them, whenfthey boldly proclaimed that their revolutionary acts were “outside of the Constitution," notice in detail; as, for instance, what he says about General Blair’s abandoning the principle of bis Broadhead letter ; what he says about the “NewDeparture” having received tho approval of the pur est and ablest Democrats in the country, Ac., and divers others which time will not allow me now even to allude to. But there is one other point in his let ter which I cannot omit a reply to, heavy as tho pressure upon my time is. He aays the Democracy neither acquiesces in nor approves of (my) extreme policy. Now my reply to “Law and Order* on this is, let us underfitand each other. As he intimates that this is but one of series of letters he intends to address to me upon tho general subjects embraced in the one before me, I would most respectfully ask of him to state in the next of his epistles what is the “extreme policy” I advocate to which he refers ? Is it extreme to say that these amendments were not constitu tionally carriedt la it extreme to say that they w ere neither proposed nor ratified as provided for in the Constitution ? Is not this au admitted truth by every just man in the country, North aud South ? Is it extreme to maintain that what was done “outside of the Constitution was revolutionary null ami void? Has not every Democrat in the country—the wises, pu eat, and ablest—so declared at the polls ? Is it extreme to urge upon the people everywhere to yield obed en- ce to these usurpations as defacto acts of tyranny, so long as they are enforced by those clothed with power to execute them; but never to sanction them as de jure or rightful parts of the fundamental laws of the Union ? Is it extreme to hold that the power of rectifying these abuses of the high trust of office remains in the People of the Stales, aud that this rectifica tion can be effected by them peacefully, and in a constitutional mode and manner at the polls'l Is there 'any thing violent or against “law and order” in the doc trine so held ? I aim to be a thorough “law and order man in every step of policy I recommend for the rescue of the liberties of this country ;and if in any thing I propose I am extreme I wish to know in what. I do hold that whatever is unconslutioually done by Congress is “nult and void,** and should be so pronounced by the courts. Is there a man in the United States—even Senator Morton himself—who will dare dispute this be fore an intelligent audience in any State in the Unipn ? Am I extreme in holding this position ? I go further, and maintain that, in the trial of persons prosecuted for a viola tion of acts of Congress, founded upon these amendments, which were carried by admitted usurpations, that the juries are judges of tho validity of the law, as well as the judges. Is this an extreme position ? Can any man deny or dis pute its correctness? Have I recom mended any course or policy for a recti fication of the usurpations of Congress which is not founded upon a strict ob servance of “law aiut order" throughout? Nay, more: have I recommended any policy which, if pursued, will not most certainly bring about a complete rectifica tion of all these usurpations, after a while at least, unless the Peoples of the United States are themselves ripe for Despotism? These are plain questions and I wish them answered. I do not myself believe that the Peoples of this country are at all ready for Imperialism,or Monarchy m any shape, and that all they want for the maintenance of the Right, is to see how they can save and preserve their liber ties in a constitutional mode and manner, and without any violation of “Law and UJatrljee, lerorlrp, <?tc. FALL TRADE—1871. SHARP & FLOYD, Jewelers aud Silver.Smiths, FINE WATCHES (If Sterling Time-Keeping Qualified, Elegantly dated. AN STOCK, New 8tyle« Pearl, Coral, Roman Gold 8eta, Bracelets, , Shirt and Sleeve Buttons. Beautiful Opera, Vest and Guard Chain*. UNEQUALLED DIAMOND Embracing »« VERY FINE JITgUEgL Sterling Nilverwure lor* Wedding Present*, En graved without Charge in Superior Style. Fine Plated Ware, French, Marble and Bronze Clock*, Wedding Fans, Artistic Bronzes, etc. We aro Agenta for the DIAMOND SPECTACLES, The Beat Aid to Impaired Sight Known. We give personal attention to Repairing of Jewelry and Watches, Aud have the Finest Workmen in the City. We take Pleasure in Showing our Storo aud Stock to all. * IfV Offer Greatir Inducements than Heretofore to Purchasers Septl8-dtf SHARP & FLOYD. There are many point* in the letter ot ‘Law and Order” which I should likoto insurance Company. Seven Per Cent. Interest Paying Plan The Missouri Mutual Life Insurance Company OF NT. LOUIS. MO. JTothing- Concealed- -Jrothlng Exaggerated, lions Raised. -JTo raise Expeeta- EVER, does not depart from the old, well-tried and safe principlea, which underlie all sound Life In surance. It guarantees an annual dividend to Policy holders OF SEVEN PER OENT. On aU cash Premiums paid to the Company. This Dividend can be used To Reduce the jtmount of the JText Premium— To Increase th Policy ; or, Can be tPtthd awn in Cash at the End of any Pol - Pear. This is Realty a Se-cn per cent of JBoney at Com pound Interest, Coupled uith the Advantages of Life Insurance. There is no uncertainty about tbe AMOUNT of the Annual Dividends to Policy holders. It la a definite sum, fixed in the face of the Policy, being Seven Per. Cent. Compound Interest, on tbe amount of mo ney paid by tho Policy holder to the Company, and left in its bauda. All Policies Non-Forfeitable After Two Full ANNUAL PAYMENTS ARE MADE. 'rfoitiug law in adopted by tho Compan _ . . i Premium, the cash aurrendor value o; Policy and keeps it in forco till the Kurrendcr value ia exhausted. If tho full annual Premium ia paid every year in cash, and al! Dividends or Interest Accumulations 1 ft in the hands of the Company FOR NINE YEARS, the Policy will become SELF-SUSTAININQ , .od lump it Keif Id force for It. full .monut WITHOUT ANY F URTHER Order.' Aluxasdeh H. Stephens. Xlliecellnncoits TO THE LADIES! Grand Display of Millinery! J. M. HOLBROOK LADIES’ BONNETS, HATS, RIBBONS, AND MILLINERY GOODS GENERALLY, Wliloli Is Now Hencly tor In spection. The moat Fashionable aud Latest Styles of Every thing in this line can be secured at his Storo. Competent LADY MILLINERS aro in attendance, who will tako pleasure in showing GOODS. FXJRSI Hi. Slock of LADIES' FCItS 1. complete. S hu them .t ALL PRICES, aud to iuit to .go.. LADIES' DEPARTMENT up SUM. over tt HAT STORE, proper. wp«A*t MERCHANTS 1 BUY CROCKERY and GLASS No. 47 Peachtree Street, -FROM— T. RIPLEY, JMPORTEB AND JOBBER. SO- ESTABLISHED It YEAR*, -fc* Keeps a large stock. Occupies THREE FLOORS—30xl» feet. Inducements offered to cash buyers Equal to any Market. Atlanta. Ga.. August 2.1871. aug 5 2 To Parties Desiring to Build eitliena of Atlanta that he Is i He has at his command a picked set of hands, and JO HAT c. JTH1HOLSL OFFICE IN A1R-UNK HOUR*. PRYOR STRUCT •ptl-fivs LANDSBERQ’S LUMBER YARD, OPPOSITE GEORGIA RAILROAD DEPOT. ATIjA nta,ga. Sawed Sbinglee mxxe% T .wflira. Wlxlto Swell. Windows «*» Ttllnrie All Rinds ot Pressed mm Framing lumber. (.bil l, A. l.dinNIBlBO * 00., PropcUtorA For all time to cc PAYMENT. Tlioao Advantages aro not Offorod toy any otlier Company. Another equitable feature in tho Company is that all its premiums taken in Georgia will be invested In the State, to assist iu building up its own resources. This Company is not confined in its operations to tbe Seven su ranee upon any the well established plans that may bo desired. For Further Information Apply to r Cent Interest Plan, but gives in- Cranston & Strobhart, General Agents for Georgia, Decatur Street. Opposite Kimball House, Atlslta, Os. fiar&uwr*, (Etillerji, 0nns, OHAS. WYNN W. L. WADSWORTH, Atlanta, Oa., | W. L. WADSWORTH & CO., Importers and Dealers in Hardware, Opposite JaniOM* Bank, September 10-ly Whitehall Street. ATLANTA, OA IFJfM. JtlJtCMLME, O. B. HOOKS* office .bf^^rrrr’ i css continuance oft be wme.apM-lv | ^rlffln.Qs.. May 12.1871. yL Uniucroitn^jpnblistiing QTompann. UNSECTIONAL, UNPARTISAN, UNPOLITICAL SCHOOL-BOOKS. The freshest series of Text-Books published—containing the latest results of discovery and scientific research. Officially adopted by ilie Virginia and Georgia State Boards of education, AND NOW LA1IQBI.Y IN USB IN T SOUTHERN 0TA.TXI, And in many Northern 8tat#s. Ike Itwvemtg fufcttshmg (fa An Association composed of many the several Southern States, feel- School-Books which should be en- unpolitical, which should present science—are now issuing a com- Tcxt-books by the eminent schol- whic.b are the Cheapest, Best, and Most of the most eminent citixens of ing the necessity for a scries of tirely unsectional, unpartisan, and only the facts of history and plete scries of School and College 0*8 and educators namyi below Beautiful School-Books Now published. The ** University Series” embraces Maury’s Geographical Skimvs, By Commodore M. F. MxuBT.of the Virginia Military Institute. A series of books which made an era in the study of this science, and which, in 'the words of a well known and ac complished Southern teacher, “ arc characterized by a felicity of arrangement and simple freshness of style which must ever render them attractive to the young, and which will be used by all who wish to teach Geography as a seknv*', as something to malps pupils think, and not merely us an enumeration of dry facts.” ♦ Holmes’ Readers and 8pellers, By Gkomqr F. Holmes, LL D , Professor of History and General Literature in the Uni versity of Virginia. A series of Readers unequalled in cheapness, excellence, and typo graphical lieauty. They arc steadily progressive in character, bright and fresh in their selections of prose and verae, and illustrative of Southern scenes, incidents, and history. Venable’s Arithmetical Series, By Charles S. Venable, LL.D., Professor of Mathematics in the University of Virginia. These books are received everywhere by intelligent tcachep with the highest satisfaction, as being most admirably adapted for mental drill, as well as for business educa tion. Their methods, rules, and reasoning* arc clear, distinct logical, tad comprehensive, and the series is carefully graded throughout. Holmes' History ot tho United States, Bv Gkorob F. Holmes, LL.D., of the University of Virginia. It is enwftfe to say of this admirable work, interesting, impartial, and tfurhfol, as well as pure ana graceful m style, th:\t it is the only History of the United States which is strictly unpswtisan. It comes down to the present date.’ Alto, De Vere’s French Crammer, Readers, eto., Clldersleeve’s Latin Series, Carter's Elements of General History, Holmes’ English Grammars. Leconte's Scientific Series, Johnston’s English Classics, Duntonlan Writing-Books, eto., etc, Bred for o.r raw llJ.L'STRATED nUSCHIPTIVK OATAI/HICK, wMtk will to mailed free to may teacher or school officer. It tells what teachers thiok of tfcs books, and contains specimen pages of each. Address UNIVERSITY PUBLISHING COMPANY, 155 SBd 167 Croshr Street, Hew York. w A . SL A YM AKER GENERAL AGENT, ATLANTA, OEOUOXA, Drawer 19, Office: Corner Marietta and Peachtree -V dlaasac