Newspaper Page Text
critin
institution.
Term ai •ubscrlptlanl
WEEKLY CONHTITUTIONper nanism 43 OP
fJAll sntocrlpUoss ars strictir ln aAranes
soAottbeerplrsbcuGf tbstbaefer which ptmra:
* mad*, nalsns ptnvlnnaly renewed, tfcn name of the
enbwrlber wl'.l be stricken from fry book..
tar cube of Ten r* •. **« »• m*
sent free to the *ert«r-*p.
ATLANTA, GA., APRIL 83. 1878
The l and Scrip.
The Clayton Time*. Tnlbotton Standard,
Cutbbcrt Appeal and Brunswick Appeal in-
done the Governor's disposition of The land
■trip, though the Standard symp.t’.ined wPh
Millcdgeville.
> UuUinilen.
Although oar “phot" friend did not come
to nee an, we did not feel alighted, as he
couldn’t come np an ordinary doable stair
case. Bat be to too good a fellow nnd rep
resent* loo earnest a defender of Democratic
principle* to he treated with silence. We re
member too well the valiant tight-which Col.
Avery has made in unearthing Radical vil
lainy about Atlanta, and throughout Bul
lock’* term, not to speak of Tnn Const nr
Tiorr as an able, honest, worthy paper, and
to give thanks when they are dot.—Sparta
T.mti and JVanter.
55=5
THE WEEKLY CONSTITUTION.
VOLUME V.J
ATLANTA, GEORGIA, TUESDAY. APRIL 23. 1872.
(NUMBER 3
DJciC IslO.NS
SLPBE5IE COURT OF GEORGIA.
[ammo rxci L.irrLr rw nr rium ltjs.ti
Tvreov, it inn racKMV, scrsxni
The aervice must be on the President of the
company.
The Central Railroad and Banking Com
pany has hr law its principal office of busi-
. ness at Savannah, and it cannot be required i
Deli tc red at Atlanta, Tuesday, Ajwu 1C, 1872. 1 to answer & goaunopt of garnishment in Any
* ether county than the county of Chatham,
unless it appear on the record that the debt it
is charged to owe is within some of the stat
utes authorizing corporations to be sued out
of the county where the principal business
office is m tuated. i
The garnishee is bound to answer what he
is indebted, etc.; before the calling of the
cause against him at the second term, unless,
by leave of the court, he i3 granted farther
time, and if he neglects so to answer until
the plaintiff has obtained Ins judgment against
the principal debtor, and the juries have
been discharged for the term, it is error in the
court to permit him then to answer unless for
good cause shown.
in this case, as it appears' from the record
that the garnishee was not bound to answer
in Richmond county at all, and was not
properly served with the summons. We af
firm the judgment of the court, discharging
Leon Guerin vs. Jacob Danfortb Claim
from Richmond.
WARNER. C.J.
On the 24th day of April, 1861, Raoult
executed a mortgage deed to Metcalf on a
bouse ami lot in the city of Augusta to secure
the payment of certain described promissoiy
notes therein recited. On the 2M day or
March. 1862, Metcalf assigned the mortgage
to Danforth. On the 2d day of January,
1865, Guerin and Raoult, who were partners,
entered into a written agreement by which
Guerin agreed l« pay the balance remaining
due by RuouJl for the house and lot molgaged
as aforesaid. On the Ctli day of December,
1867, Raoul!, the mortgagor, bargained and
sold the mortgaged premises to Guerin. At
the .January Term, 1870, of Richmond Su- the garnishee,
perior Court, Danfortb filed his petition for Judgment aifitued.
foreclosure of bis mortgage. Raoult plead Frank !i Miller, for plaintiff in error,
the statute of limitations of 186U, which was A. R. Lawtou, Davenport Jcckson, contra.
overruled by the court, which decision was
not excepted to, and ct the January Term of Henry E Clark, County Treasurer, vs.
the court, 1871, the judgment foreclosing the Samuel l>vy t Ordinary. Mandamus,from
mortgage was rendered. An execution was! Richmond,
issued and levied on the mortgaged property, I jjcCAY J
when Guerin interposed his claim there-1 m ^
On the trial of the claim cr.se, I /^ )e a4 ‘^°^ October.0,18<0, es tab.'.shins a
plaintiff in the mortgage fi fv read in °\ ^mmon schools, and reorganizing
evidence an s fc rfnient signed by Guerin, da- *»»« C^nty Boards of Education, taken :n
ted 2fitb May, IMfcl, in which he promises to !*° n J* lll . e Constitution of 1828,
p-.y Danfortb, the mortgagor, in consideration 2”?i 1U#in ^ I *?[ c ?. or Co 4 rt » and casting its
of bis forbearance to pn*s the collection of ***** n P°® llje Ordinary is a reran*] by irn-
the money due on the mortgage for twelve !? ol action 378 of the Code making
months one hundred dollars per month. R ** r “ ina, y the freasurcr of the Board of
also appears that suit was instituted on the fc r u< ? 1 , ? l0n , *J* e,r re “P cclJv f counties. The
notes describe^l in the mortgage by attach-1 ve^ s,,rrr J , f the county, and not tlie Ordina-
mrnt, on the 16»b day of December, ig®) I the Treasurer of the Boar<
Raoojt being a non-resident of the State, and |
Frank H. Miller, for plaintiff in error.
W. II. Hull, Barnes & Gumming, contra.
levied on the mortgaged property. The jury,
under the charge of the court, found the prop
erty subject to a mortgage lien and ten per
cent damages. A motion was made for a I - * T" _ „ , _
new trial on several grounds, which w&s over-1 / j. ^ Veal, Guardian,
ruled l»y the court, and the claimant e.\c« pt- ■ - Arran * dispossess tenant, fiom \\ ash
ed. The principal ground of error insisted
inglon.
on in the nrgument before this c«»urt was as McCAY, J.
*? the ruling of the court below in relation to | W hcn in a procee a in , under sections
i Crap Raws.
The Louisville Ledger has direct crop news
from Kentucky, Tennessee, Alabama, Gtor-
gin, Mississippi, Arkansas, Indiana, Illinois.
There is increased acreage in cotton in
Mississippi, AI leans**, Alabama aad Tennes
see. Tliero is Increased tobacco production
in Tennessee, Kentucky, and Indiana.
The corn crop promises to be Urge. Some
replsoting is necessary, bus ibe general crop
to coming up welt. But little corn planted
in Kentucky nnd Indiana.
The wheat crop in Alabama, Tennessee,
Kentucky, Indiana and Illinois is fine,
abundant, and larger in quanily Ibm last
year.
Fecit and oats arc just as promising as
they can be.
Colonel Junius Wingfield. "
Tbs Macon Telegraph announces the death
of this wrll-kunwii Georgian,fin Mscon, on
(Saturday, after a severe three weeks’ illness
with heart disease.
Colonel Wingfield was bom at Grcenalmro,
olid was fifty-eight years old. lie was at
West I'uint a while, and graduated at lie
State University of Georgia in 1833 at twenty-
one years. He was a lawyer, s State Senator
la ts'ii and lk55, and a delegate to the Na
tional Democratic Convention in 1800 at
Charleston.
The writer knew him long and intimately.
To Une abilities lie added * parity and love-
line- * of character seldom seen. lie was a
Christian gentleman, a bright mqmtier and
leader In the Presbyterian church.
Honor to a good man’s memory.
Democratic Success,
Out Washington correspondent appears to
think, in his last latter, that in the event of
the Cincinnati! Convention taking inch n
course at will unite the Republican party, the
Democracy will have a poor chance. Wc
differ With him. We are hopeful for the
Democracy under any aspect, if ilia party is
true, harmonious, resolute, discreet and un-
•cet totalized. The prospects are very bright
finder good management and a judicious
strategy. The indications are very cheer-
tag. „ „ • -
Georgia Crop Newa.
Monroe county—Some cotton planted, but
the general planting to yet to bn time, say*
-Wrote;S Advci -or. vLeii guano Used
than last year. On plant Lamphin has clovet
SC inches long.
Butts county—Complaints of late plant
ing ; hut one instance of cotton put in; large
acreage of all crops; laborers working
reasonably well; short homo supplies; food . •,
to be raised; wheat and oats promising; 1 jjj*»"iv^ n 2S? <M too-'o" MONTGOMERY, J.
. ■ ... .in .. . , ' I ton,) appears to have been affirmed. (25th I . , .,
fruit uninjured, say* the Forsyth Advertiser. 1 lirp., 310) Tho court say in the last I An executory contract for the sale of goods
Sumter county—Form operations very sc- J case" cited’’: “According to the views which *° •? delivered at a future day, where both
tivc. says the Republican. I we have taken of this case, the mortgagors I P arllc3 nr ® nwure that the sclicr expects to
tag,, eonld not have resisted the foreclosure of the i , “ rc ' , .*; e himself U. fulfill his contract, and
Heard County-Farmers badly behind, mcr ^ a am , p i ain|icr ln error ratmot no skill and labor or expense enters into the
says the News. occupy a more favorable relation to the cose, consideration, lmt the same is a pure speuto-
Early county—Poor stand* of corn; little I He purchased the properly subject to them, I tionupon clijnecs, is contrary lo the policy
cotton planted says the News. Small grain «>d if lie wishes to retain it he must pay the of the law and can be enforced by nenher
cmion pianiea. mysjne jew^ mortgnra." The rule established by the p»“y- But wnere sueh » contract is execu-
louks well, such ns rye and oata unaimm.us decision of this court os I under- to L “ n , employed by Lis principal to
Clarke county—Farm and garden opera-1 , (a n l it, is that the judgment of fore-1 make He cmlnu-l, can recover fmm linn any
tlor,s vrry active, quotha tlic Banner. | closure of the mortgage against the mort-1 m mey he tnay have advanced in the trans-
Miicbell counlV—Short crops certain: I stsgor in ll.is case concliuled the claimant aetion by h's nndiori.y or withont ailtlior-
“ ':„a ,i„Trr„ o rin the "hopurchased from him suhsequent to the >?•«theprinrnpal.a ersuchodvan e.rattfy
•oni lo tc replanted, and little cotton in the I | i;c ^ ||m mi>r , g ^ e fr0 „rp!cadin Z the his agent’s act m maxing it
ground, aays the HeralA I statnie of limitations against that judgment, I Jndgmen. revcrewl.
ltsiiks county—Farmers behind. Wheat I although, he was n'o patty to it, and upon I J - ®- 9- ?’’‘. ok ’ "• *• Walton, \V. H. Hull,
looks a ell, hut little planttsL No c '“™ t ^ : 1 J^ri"!, t °* rSSSlJhRtSKnk IL MUIer.
vtolile, says the Athens W atchman. I ^ merita ot t!lr caae independent of the I art ti
Monroe and Pike counties-Cotton jilnnt-l 5ta tuie of limitations,) and although there John 9. Coleman, Trustee,eta,ra Thomas
log begun, aud hut little com above ground, I may have been some errors in the ruling of j c txv i mt * rom *> lc “ mond -
•ml much of that roust he replanted. Lee, the courtsutataplial Justice haalKsm done,
. i , » I apd the verdict ought not to be disturbed. I ine sauing oi laBinmvi.inai note tmuer
com than usual planted. Graiff unusually LeI ,i,c judgment of tho courtbelow be af- sesl of 8 S“ anl,8 “ h y * ,iH hn»h*n« of the
promising, lavs wheat than usual sown. I finned. | ward in settlement pr the guardian's account
All bu.y, says the Macon Telegraph. I Joseph P. Carr, for plaintiff in error.
Floyd county—Farmers working vigorous-1 W. V. Gould, Frank H. Miller, contra.
ly for ten days of good weather, says the McCay j and Mimt-oroery, J-, concur IF® 1 ® 38 ® hi I n “ from sn y i 1811 . all liabdity'grow-
Commercial. upon the following grounds “ mg ont of or connected wrtlr said guardian-
Hancock county—Farmers preparing for s Wlis’Jicr a purchaser of mortgaged real cs- ™P> ihe hmi^nd 0 ^™
. *i ‘rr 5M ,„ I late U conchuleil hv the i’Kl.tmpnt of foreclo-1 sctlicmept, umter vrliicn the nusban-.t is tms-
largnr cotton crop than ever, any. the Time* j ^ c w ®> c d ® d c > f„,„ 8ct . | tea limits the property settled (ofwhW. the
* • ■ I liug up defenses, to the mortgage occurring, I no, . e ! s P art ) *® ™* ' v *°r ' vl ;h re-
Cors Use Ease Strop Season Give | liia purel::v-i*, :v:ul before the judgmeut nisin lers over, is a r.ovsU in of the original
causa* far Despondency! | of foreclosure. Quore? debt of the euardian and destroys us hdu-
— I Aimn-ii-wv of uii,K«ml nroner-v with I clary character. And it pnro! evidence be
The planting season ail over the country is j of ^ befoS any pro- introduced to shpiv that the patties really in-
late—in the West, North and South. The I ceding t . foreclose Ws emumenegd, has, by I »" discharge tue gugrdian as sucl.
delay varies from two to>ix weeks, according I contract with the holder of the mortgage, pro- aI "' *® ‘Y.frv^Tfber'fin.'lTn
til's dt.oj :t cause for foreboding ? Wc think I ;11 ,ii t,.,rred by the statute of limita-1 Tc ^ dl ® t
It I lions, if, in fact, l!ie proceedings to foreclose Judgment e.fflrmcd.
The New York Bulletin gives the follow-1 were commenced before the tlmefitrod by the ’
River for twclre ytvs, which shows the I purchaser a new uay of payment, and toex-
diffiTcncc of tho opening of the seasons of I tend the running of the statute, ju to him at.
those rears* I least, until that oar has passed. | »Vukinson.
ZMI ... March s 119C7 Msreb m Judgment affirmed. j MO^TGO^EIIY, J.
'■'•'■”^.1 Si”“S3 “’■TlS ScrupTTwimd:0Icero Oib. ^^iLlfenlinfi,“filing to
Isis iii4ti an Mnicnttl son, administrator. Complaint, from Glass-1 tnrn to pi S u,tiffi n fi .fa. the properly, the
>*• Mmn sz | I3*s April 51 cook. __ I purchase of which created the debt on which
Tire average of these twelve seasons to 1 ”AKri r,K, U. J. ..... I the judgment to founded, should have been
Match 83. I The piamtifi in the courtbelow brought an I ^(1 Sheriff ordered to proceed
‘■ *o- .... I action on a promissory note against the oc-1 ,, h lh
In <8S3 the season opened very late, but 1 f ea dant, wbn filed a plea of set-off. On the I j Q d»mcnt reversed
a little earlier than this year, and the crops I trial of the case, the plaintiffs made a motion I j u ul h<-rford, J. Wingfield, E. Ccmming,
were never more abundant. We not only I to ^ ®w a on th.^ground of Ifcr pbeimiff in error.
riage of the testator subsequent to the
making of the will, in which no provision
was nude in contemplation of such an event,
and pray that an intestacy may be declared
by the judgment ot the Court Have they
the legal right to have the will of the testa-
tor revoked, and an intestacy declared in their
favor under the pnblic law of the State ?
That tin will was made by the testator be
fore his marriage with Mrs Peebles is an un
disputed fact; that no provision is made in
that will In contemplation of such an event
is also an nndeniable fact What is the law
applicable to this statement of facts ? The
Code declares that “in ail cases the marriage
of the testator subsequent to the making of a
will, in which no provision is made in
contemplation of such an event, shall
be a revocation of the will. But it
to said this law was not intended
for their benefit, but for the benefit of the
wife and children born of the second mar
riage. The reply to, that the law to general
in its terms and declares whatshall be a revo
cation of a testator’s will, and if tbe will is
revoked by the commandment of the law, Hie
children who are the legatees of the testator
under that will, may claim the benefit of
that law, if it to thcW Interest to do so. It
was the intention of the General Assembly,
in the enactment of the law, to establish a
fixed and definite role in regard to the revo
cation of wills in case of marriage or the birth
of a child subsequent to tlic making of a will
by the testator, so as to avoid all controversy
in relation to that question.
The decisions of tbeconrts in England nnd
in this country were conflicting as to the
proper construction of the common law rule
in relation to tbe revocation of wil's by the
subsequent marriage of tbe testator and birth
of children. That was the mischief which
the Act of 1324. substantially embodied in
the Code, was intendwl to remedy, and it is
the duty of the courts to enforce it so as to
suppress the mischief, aud advance the rem
edy, and not to perpetuate tbe
should have some difficulty in bolding sc wilmit it, his ow,Ha-half, unless for the spe
r'>r*iir,'Fi«> th«r genera! principles *■/ tlit* lnw, I c ;..t ,.r ,. rilv : T „ r I.,,.,.. 4 r .,„ c li r
llv.il lUc claiimiit wa» concluded l.y lliojtid*®- in , i: ' r n!] ; d ' j^k£T'
mi ni of foreclosure «f the mortffago n^inst I Xi e i L e v «
the mortgagor, he not having liven a party t« L>, enliri lyfoamy I, Jet not so con-
thut proj ecting. It is true he bad notice of tr.uy to the UMimony w to justify this court
tbe mortgage lien when ho purchased the I ; a overruling th-: judgment of tlie jud»e re-
sroperty from the mortgagor, and purchased f usin „ „ ne * J =
tsuhi.-et t’ that lien, as it eppeami on the J Lsngmade & Evans, for plaintiff in error,
face of the mortgage; bnt the point in tbe I j 0 b n X. uihnore, Carswell & Denny,
ease is, whether lie was concluded by the |contra. J*
judgment of foreclosure against the morl-1
gagor from showing when that judgment in- G . p, J3!fr T , j- w Thrasher Rule lo
,Ue P r "I* rt >- .IWritufe money, fro^fo^T^
that the debt which the mortgnge was given ..p, v . 3 6
to secure had been cxtin^uislird bjr piyiucnl I ••
thereof, or by the statute of iimiudious. If I When in a contest, between judgment cretl-
llie mortca^or, by ne^li^cnce or fraud, falls I >tor?, in the distribution of money raised
to set up bis legal defense to the proceeding I ^ r °ro Bie sale of defendant's property, it was
to foreclose tbe mortgage, is the claimant I offered to prove the sayings of the defend-
concluded from doing so, when not a party I a! *!, that tbs judgment of one ct the crcdi
to that preceding? If tbe mortgagor or bis 1 tors wris paid, and it was alleged that there
djit-cUl agent fail to set ur> any defense, it Is I was proof of a conspiracy between the de-
not competrnt for any third person to inter-1 fendant and Hut creditor to keen open the
pose. (Code 388!*.) 'But docs the judgment execution with intent to defraud other crcdi-
of foreclosure conclude those who are not I lors :
pnrli(*s lo tlul proceeding who c T niin an in-1 H ki.d, That the evidence wa9 properly reg-
tercst in the mortgaged property ? As aur I ulntcd, there being no proof of a wonspiracy
own mode of foreclosing mortgages on real I*hc time the sajinga, sought to be proven,
estate Is a substitute for a till iu equity, I were nude.
the safer course would undoubtedly be to I .In this case the evidence justifies the Ter-
make nil persons interested in tlic mortgaged I diet, since even admitting that the older fi. fa
iroperty parties. In Knowles vs. Lawton I is to be credited with $17,000 in lS6i, there
18IU Go.,Rep, 476.) this Court held that a I <* *U11 more due, apparently upon it, than
Qdgment foreclosing a Imtflf* binds p* he July have found,eVetiif theiisttV/proreu
lot™ only the »*•
the legal
to the paper
dated 24th May, 1S6«, aud in the general
charge *as to the law in regard to
e nvocalion of the testators will.
The motion for a continuance was properly
overruled by the court. The witnesses did
not reside in the county where the trial was
hod, and, under the general !atv of the State,
were not compelled to attend tlic court in an
other county. If the proponnders of the will
had desired to attach ihc original will of the
testator to interrogatories to be exhibited to
the witnesses, the court, on a proper showing,
would have granted an order for that pur
pose, as is the usu-tl practise of the courts
when it becomes nectss-try to prove the J ac
tum of a deed, or other instrument, filing a
copy thereof in the Clerk's ofuee —-L«kIo, s?n-
tious 3748,3471,2394,3821,3180. The inter
rogatory put to Mrs. Doruh Atkinson was
ubstsntially answered by her.—Molt vs.
Hall, Maer & Co., 41st Geo. R»p., 117. unstained, The difficulties experienced of
Mrs. Deunrcc was a competent witness— late years in bringing any* laws of Congress
Brown and wife vs. Carroll, oGili Geo. It. p., j R> “ judicial test are ro discouraging that tlie
088. The iaw requires that a will should tie j pouer to check unconstitutional legislation,
attested and subscribed by at least three wit- which the Supreme Court, has intended to
tfor, out
also I w * proper deduction, which we do not admit.
his vendfce, and this ii does, nit hough] Judgment affirmed,
the vendeo may not bo a pally to it. i A. G. & F. O. Foster, J. A. Billups, for
Tho case of Johnston vs. Crawly *(22a Geo. j plaintiff in e rror. Thrasher & Thrasher,
Rep. 348,) would seem to hold differently, | A. Ibjcse, contra.
but that case was decided by two judges I
only, ninl when that same case again came I Warren, Lane & Co. vs. '•Vflson C. Ilewitt
fore tbe court.all tbe judges being present, | Complaint, from Richmond.
which note is payable to the husband as trus
tee, of !i;s wife, and a receipt in full by hus
band and wife to tbe guardian, whereby they
,. , , ... i cueci ox »ucu a contract is to vx as xo me i _ „ .... x» ▼ r«
for twelve yrara, which shows tt* purchaser a new day ot payment, and to ex-1T. N. Bell admmistraror, vs. E. J. Coates et
mceof tho opening of tbe seasons of I tend the running of the btaiule.jM to him at 1 n ., ot *°“ to open 3 u “S mf:nt » Irom
toad,Jen,y of ,00., wry tow. but napoRrfm.1 Chambers, hv brief,
great deal. In 1865 the season opened at the! their, own debt, as required by the Act of I
average time, am] there was * general failure I WTO The dfitomUnt resisted the molion The E x«u t oraof L- J. Deupreera. Lucy Y.
of crops, p-irlleul.rly in wheat In 1869 tbe] on taepoundjha..h* Denpree, et ak Probate of Will, from
aeasou was late, bnt tbe whei
crops were magnificent, the < _ _ .
fallin - .lion ln 1870 the season wsa also I shoold be made or filed as required by the 1 l. The marriage of a testator or the birth
• . "f ■ «’ „r —,1 .belt I Act of 1870. The court dismissed the plain-1 of a child to him subsequent to the making
tale- Tne finest crops of cotton I tiff’s action, and tbe defendant excepted. Iu I of a will, in which no provision to made in
known were harvesud, and tho corn crop 1 ou r judgment, it was rrror for the conrt to | contemplation of such an event, is by pre
ss ample I dismiss the plainiilT* action os Ikeir own I sumption of law a revocation of the will,
U .o7, ,k« vcrr drfw. being n I im>tioa against the consent of the defendant I and this presumption cannot be rebutted by
1941 UcScftW J Jt & I | ....f.ota .1 !jolo;/vl In IhA rf>. I onv rtiwric v-llrtp* rtf lti<» tpatqtnF tritFlltpr
MGNTGuMERY, J.« concurring.
I concur in the judgment of the court, as
pronounced by Judge McCay, except upon
one point.
Tbe synopsis of my views i? contained in
the follo'wing principles:
1. The common Imw attaches a tacit condi
tion to ai! wills, that if tbe testator marries
and has if site subsequent to tbe making of bis
will, the will u revoked, unless provision i
made in tbe will, or oGiencine, for such issue
If he devise only a portion of his estate, the
condition does not attach.
2. The act of December, 1834, titers the
common law in three particulars only: 1st.
Marriage or birth, without provision, re
vokes ; Secondly, If only a part of testatoris
estate is disposed of, the will is revoked;
Thirdly, An order of the Court of Ordinary
declaring an intestacy, is necessary.
3. Section 2441 of the Code is a substitute
for the act of 1834, but so far a9 it is applica
ble to the present case, does not alter that
law.
4. It follows that under our law, a provision
by marriage settlement for future wife and
issue, will lie a compliance with the condi
tion, and prevent revocation.
WARNER, C. J.. dissenting.
On the 27th of June, 1853, Lewis J. Deu-
pree made bis will, and on the 8th of Sep
tember, 1859, be made a codicil thereto. On
tbe 24tii of Miy, ltd!, he married Lucy J
Peebles. Prior to said marriage an ante-nup
tial contract was unde between the parties,
securing to his intended wife all the property
she then had. and settling upon her the sum
of $10,000, in consideration cf which it was
covenanted and agreed that the will of said
Deupree should stand, and that she would no!
caveat the same, and provided abo that if
any children should be born after said mar
riage, that they should take an equal share
under his v.ill with hi* other children named
therein. The will, codicil and deed of nmr-
riago settlement were ad propounded for c ‘y • lo perpetuate the mischief by
probate as the last will and testament of the fa°‘ n S behind the Act to find the proper rale
testator, to which the widow and children of construction in sucUlcases, when the Act
Dcupree by a former marriage filed their piamiy declares what the'rule shall be.
caveat, on the ground that the original Tne law does not inletfere with the right
will and codicil was revoked by the subre-1 ® te-stator to dispose of bis property by
vuent marriage of the testator, and that ihc j will; it simply declares to him, that if he
paper offered a3 a testsmentarv paper,} marries after miking his will, in which no
dated 24tli May, 1864, was not attested and; provision is made in contemplation of such
subscribed by the witnesses thereto in the I ,tn ewat* tkftt will shaU bc icojkcd, and be
presence of tire testator, and thcref-.re could j ‘ n! ' k .® h f „ ‘’•'sires to horsed the amount paid for tax mid hands
not operate as a will On the trial of the I dispose of 1m pro>-r y oy will. In 0VC r >ho rertifirais lo th- nnrrhascr The
ease,tbe Jmy fonnff » verdict In tavorof n w [ othtr ^ won... must_ producer, tlie naj payer of the tax, lias no
ouk Washington letter.
Another View or tlie Cotton Tax BUI
—TheSt. Croix Land Bill—Political
aud Congressional Hotel.
WasinSGTOSf, April 13,1873.
I notice in Tint Cokstttctiok of the Gth
instant tbe text of the bill to refund the cot
ton tax, accompanied by editorial indorse
ment My information leads me to regard
the measure less favorably. Indeed, I have
reason to beli re that this bill to the work of
the biggest lobe ver known in Washington.
The amount to be refunded under this act to
estimated at $65,0:0,000; and it to said a cor
ruption fund of $10,000,033 has been raised
to be used if occasion requires. But every'
body knows that a much less sum than
ten millions will buy any kind of a job
through Congress. Tom Scott has bought
up a majority in each Houso with railroad
passes alone, and this enables him to gel what
legislation he requires to further his interests.
But to return to the cotton tux lobby. These
claims arc mostly held in New York; and it
to in the interest of Ihe New York holders
that the lobby is working. Do you suppose
that a small claimant would travel all the way
to Washington to get his claim adjudicated
before the commbiun which it ia proposed
to have set here? -Naturally ho could not
afford it, and so ho must cither abandon bis
claim or part with it to some agent of the
ring at a heavy discount Why shimld such
a commission "sit at a point so rcutoie. from
the cotton growing region? The answer is.
Because it suited the purposes of the cotton
tax ring to have it here. Now supposo this
hill becomes a law, what per cent of the real
tax paves will receive a dollar? Avery inliai-'
tcsimal fraction, I assure you. The piantcrcar-
rics his crop to the ncurcsl market, where we
will say the quotations were twenty cents
for middlings. When he comes to soil bo to
told that twenty cents is tho rate for tax paid
cotton: 'He knows nothing of the circumlo
cutionary details of tho internal revenue of
fice, and so disposes of his cotton to a mer
chant for 18 cents, the buyer payingtSV
tax of two cents, nnd receiving tl.e
certificate for the same. When lie re-sells
cotton he is of - course re im-
Dlr, Stephen.
Sir. Stephens, in Tuesday evening’s edition
of the Sun, has, among other jthings, the fol
lowing to say in reply to a short editorial in
Tub Constitution, urging that a charge tf
t ie Washington Patriot against Mr. Slept-
ensof being buried in the “effete past,” wrs
unjust in view of Mr. Stephens’ indorsement
of Judge Davis, a Republican in politics, as
one whom “the true friends of constitutional
liberty everywhere could support
The object of its production wc dp . not
know, and are not quite sure that wc cor
rectly understand the exact tenor of iu bear
ing.
\\ e have not been fortnnatc enough to see
the article in the Washington City Patriot to
which reference is made, and . against the
“unjust” charges of which our neighbor so
promptly enters his protest, and generously,
it «e mid ucm, ventures upon our vindication.
If that—if real vindication—was the object
of our neighbor, as we should unbcsitatiugly
vievy it, but for a quesliouab e tone pervad
ing it, we must say to him what we trust he
will excuse us for saying, that he has very
bungliugly performed wnat he so kindly
undertook to do. He will also please pardon
us for saying further (if we aic wrong) that
the tone of his seeming vin-ticalion strouglv
impresses us with the belief that the objec't
was not so much, manfully to defend, as in
directly to assail. How this really is, as be
approaches us in such “dubious th.ipv,” we
leave him to explain.
We sup’irest to him, however, that when
ever friend or foe is quoted, either for defense
or attack, the language quote! should he fu‘1
enough, at least, to give the exact meaning
of the words used. This we conceive our
neighbor did not do in reference to us iu the
present instance; and espetldly as he refers
to the lost Friday’s issue of the Sun, as tlie
date of our opinion ih-.t Judge Davis i* such
a “ Liberal Republican ” as true friends every
where could support. ,
He must know reiy well that wc expressed
the same opinion of him, as far as we were
cognizant of his public acts and sentiments,
very v»on after liis name was presented bv
the Labor Reform Convention. We thought
thin, and on Friday last, and still think, that
ihc Democracy, in their present demoraliza
tion in some Suites, produced by tlie “New
Departure Leaders,* may go farther and fit re
a great deal worse than they will in .support
ing any one, who, though he may cull him.se f
a ** Liberal Republican,’* or take any other
party n:unc, yet holds that the reruns!ruction
measures of Congress were unconiriuttionul
aud therefore void,
1 lie language of the Patriot wc never saw,
...v,. n.« ,« i ‘fi; m qiitto’son become a law. it will ne Held ur
‘/•J 1 ' f'Ctovhi 1 fa? ii™ ii cr * lo tlie Sout!» for ye.rs us an act of uyxgiia-
hi i viinf *L n „r! irif.itIt J ™ ll e i nimby, whereas its true title should be: “A
lion of tho testator’s will, and that he Zl | P ,u ot ccrtain
iiUestate, under fhe slatcment of facts, dis- ** )rl iern S P C( ^^ulators.
* - - - - ^ xnE ST. CUOIX LAND GRAB DILL.
I thought the St. Croix Land-grub bill hnd
received the quietus; but the lofit-j. hliving
this gross swindle in hand, i3 still active, and
but for the action of one honest man, Gen.
Kctchuin, of New York, might h ve ob
tained their object ere this. The Committee
of Conference on the part of the two ileuses
failed to agree, nnd this fact was reported to
the Senate, and a new commiltc asked for.
Legal Information.
The case of Charlotte Usher, a colored
woman, against the Richmond City Railway
Company, for ejectment *rom one <»f the
street cars, lias been compromised on tlie pay
ment of $3C0 by the latter.
Constitutionality op the Ku-Klux
Laws.—Spcakirgof the attempt now making
to ic*t the consritolronality of the Ku-Kinx
law* bef* re the Supreme Court, the New Yor£
Po^t, a R'pub’ica i paper, wqrs: “The pub'lo
has an interest in having those principles on
liicli personal liberty rests protected and
attested and subscribed by at least three wit
nes3es in the presence of the testator, and the
question made on tbe trial was, whether .the
paper writing, dated 24th May, 1S34, pro-
pmvided a# £ will, had Lccu nUestod-uml sr»lr-
scribed by the witnesses in the presence of
tbe testitor so as to make it a valid will.
The attestation clause to the. paper recited that
ii was signed, ceded nnd delivered in the
presence of the three witnesses, but did not
recite that it was attested and subscribe?! by
them in thp presence of tlie testator. If tlic
attestation clause had so recited, tbpn th?
legal presir.nplh.n would have been that it
was attested and subscribed by the witnesses
the pre sence of the t* stator, in the absence
any ev’.dcnro to the contrary thereof.
The point in ihc case was not whether the
testator signed, sealed, nnd delivered the pa
per in the presence ot the witnesses, but did
the tl r.-e witnesses altc st and subscribe tlic
same in the presence of the testator. The
attestation clause docs not recite that they
did, and therefore the attestation clause
furnishes no legal presumption H3 to that fact,
and there was no errpr in the charge of the
court in relation to that point in tbe case, o(
which tho propoundin’of the paper have any
U-gal right to complain. The attestation
c'aiu'C does not recite that the witnesses at
tested and subscribed the paper in the
presence of the testator, so as to raise
the legal presumption therefrom, that they
did, which was tlie material fact to be estab
lished—either by presumption, or affirmative
evidence. The evidence in ihc record upon
that point in the case fully sustains th« ver
dict and rebuts tlie legal prasumpt’on con
tended for, if there had been any foundation
for it in the attestation clause, cs claimed by
the propounders of the paper. The cyidcnct
‘ i the record upon that point ia thr ea.‘c was
..uChas to require «be verdict which the jury
found—setting aside the paper writing pro
pounded as a will, dated 24th May, 1 S .C!
That paper being out of the way, as a will,
the next questiou to be considered, is whether
L. J. Dcaprce died intestate, according to the
laws of this State, in other words, whether his
will made prior to his marriage was revoked.
There U no provision made in the will of the
testator in contemplation of such an event.
The 2141st section of the Code declares, that
“In all cases, the marriage of the tert itor, or
the birth of a child to him, subsequent to tbe
inakingof a will in which no provision is made
in contemplation of such an event, shall be a
revocation of £ts will.” But it is said, that
it was not the intention of tue testator in this
case to revoke his will; that is undoubtedly
so, and the question is, which is to control
the intention of the testator, or the public
law of the State. There can be no doubt as
t » the plain meaning and intent of the law,
and where the intention of the testator is in
conflict with the law, that intention must
po:st>s, has almost ceased to exist.”
Tun Custom ist Counting Brices—A
case has bi eu dt cidcij H th» Otiqri pf
nv-n I*leas; of ‘New York, bcfoie Judge
KuVnson, which is of importance to both
contractors and builders. The a<ii>m \f.as
brought by EJward Fitzgerald against \V. &
C. II. Reman to foreclose a mechanic’s Hen.
From ihc facts in the case it would appear
that Fitzgerald contracted to do the mason
work of seven houses, bail ling l>v the de
fendants, and to lay the brick at six dollars
a thevnimd. In computing tl»j number
of brick, he cu-rged for" nil the
openings, measuring solid, which gave him
$2,300 more than he meivctl, and for
wliich he filed :i lien. On his behalf it was
claimed that the measurement was :xco;ding
to m ognized custom, while on lii * part of
defendants it was not only claimed that no
such custom existed, but that by mistake
they ha.I overpaid |.lainttff $120 18.. The
court decided in favor of defendants, can-
ccllins the lien, aud giving judgmeut in their
favor for $;2j 21 and costv.
i.et Ph tTpRoaK ni r. ito »,
Kingston, Ga., April It, 1372.
Et.lilqrs CwslittUion: As a subscriber awl
frlcntl c*f your paper, which is weii repre
sented in this community, I would call the
attention of your numerous rendera to ou
thriving little village and the surroundin'
country.
As n summer resort Kingston presents the
-advantages of fine air, good^water, a moral
community, and acef-gs bv rail to any section
of the country, and \ye have nearly com
pleted one of the finest an l most commodi
ous hoUild in North Georgia.
The surrounding country has a large area
of fine farming hinds, and our farmers are
pressing forward with energy in preparing
for and planting their crops. The wheat
crop has improved wonderfully in the last ten
days, and with a continuation of favorable
weather will make a good average yield. Our
fruit crop is. also promising. Fertilizers arc
Gen. Eel chum had charge of tlie report to he
iqade to the House, but finding on Vt eduesday
that the lobby hall managed, by trading votes,
find inducing igcipbers to absent themselves—
particularly Democrats who had voted against
tlie job on a former occasion—he withheld,
t ic report, and will not present it anti! Tues
day next He gave notice of this d» *crmina-
liqn yesterday, so that those who absent
themselves will do so knowingly.
A prominent member of Congress says
this is the most iniqwtous scheme he
has known during his public career, and tlmi
unless the press of the country comes to tin* ,
rescue it will certainly succeed. H i- 115
©*ra Fmm Hew*. A. T, .tlnclntyre,
member of Cemrcis I'rimGeorgla
••About the C«tt*n Tax Bill.
HouSk or Rjctresrntatives,
WAsniNGiON, D*. C., April 10,1872.
Editors Const Untie*: Ia your issue of the
6th instant you puWhhed a copy of the bill
to refund cert&ia taxes collected by the
Government of the United Slates on*raw
cotton during the years 13G5-C-7-3,” now
pending before Cor.crcae, and in an editorial
on the subject say. “we cannot doubt that
this bill will receive the zealous support of
every member-and senator from Georgia and
her sister Southern Stile*.’
As it may be cxj.ectod of me, as a “mem
ber” from Georgia, to give this bill a “zealous
support ” and as I car. net do so unless material
amendments are matie to the bill, I desire to
give the lessons thnefor.
The producers of raw cotton, upon which
the tux was Imposed sut$l the money collected,
in nearly every instanae. Mill? r rhipped the
cotton to tbe commi.-sioo-inerchant, who ad
vanced tho tax for tbe prt*hicer and retained
the tax to advanced ••.* «>k< r expenses from
the proceeds of the <>f the cotton, and
remitted the balducc tuSihe pni-iuter, or the
producer **dd the m t|^ cotton buyer,
when the tax was dciljiaal from tlie proceeds
ot sale, the producer ntse uctuallv
paying the toix,^and l^ay.ng the receipt of
the revenue officer, if .ry writ* given, in the
hands of other paitiis than t!ic producer; if
110 receipt was given, leaving the entry of
oaymenton the b.x.k • .'/^Ute rovetiue officer
in the naine of such other parties.
After this lax was j^d, part ha interested
made the question thai ihc law under which
the tax was Impose,! w.u. unconstitutional,
aud submitted 11 to >ue court, by which it
was expected to establish tho fact that the
parties who paid the t a Had a legal interest
to the revlitutiqp of tbe same. But the court
below held tho law to be constitutional, and
the court above being equally ^divided, left
the division of the court below affirmed, and
the I gal right of the tax payer to restitution
ignored. • ?
By reference to the bill u will be peen that
reference is mado to prtdveers in the pream
ble. but none h made in ti;- enacting clauses
of the bill.
The decision of thr court softies the ques
tion that no party rif t ht to this
fund, and that •he fur. i« conatituiionally in
the Treasury of the U r i*cd Stales. This be
ing so, if the bill t-hiil 'H.c«*mo a law, it will
amount to a donation, an& if a donation, no
iiarty will have any teg l Interest in the fund
Umated, except the paiiy iu whom this bill
’realcs the legd right^/JLi any other hy
United States AesessoriJcanlngs Intredn *ed s^triM
of rcsolntions condemning Goreraor Smith for appro.
Pristioc^rlCBltcrxl land .crip to bloit.il utHOKsej
st Athens, sad kiting none to the tiKroe % and sp.
pointing Jutes Tite, Prat Ware. John L. Conlsr,
and United Suits District Attorney Firmer. I* look
Intott. Resolution ansniooaslj adopted.
Jue. Atkins. Collector of Customs at Ssrinnsb.
4b.-n repotted following dclegsts. to Mscon Conren-
on:
Juiee A-kins, OoDeclor of Customs *t Sannnak;
Henrrr. Farrow, United State* District Alton.er-
James L. Donning, United States Postmaster; TTm*
JranlRgs, baited States Rercano Assetaor Wm.
Mark lam Candidate; Marshal] deGraffcnrtei lata
Clark of Goreraor Bollock; D. D. Solder, ei-U. 9. Aa-
ecaror; A. Jackson, W. Flash, Jamta A. Tree. Mick
Mitchell and Mitchell Cwgj-lr, nejroes.
Mr. Atkins tins reported a list of twenlf-on.
names as county KnottsnCommittee, of whL-h one
half were oOco holder*
Ant'd mnch cnatneion meeting adjourned after Mr.
Atkins, Collector of Coeloms at Earannah, had torn
tho shirt off of Sebum, and nil other Republican Re
formers, and announced himself a* entirely unacl-
- for Grant tor rreeldent for next four years.
and tiieictorc conld not q<tute Tin- f .ct of P°t'i®sto tvusIrdo, ilierc msul.l bV no nccesti-
■oui an er. 'vtorllibhilL Tlten i, el^cmld’ e distinctly
UU1 Utl Ittrllinli II « .. ...I. f 1 -* s*n
got from
he Pa'ri its assault
change.
Wc regret very much tliat we‘ bungled” Sb
as to put our contemporary in sncli a maze
Of perplexity os to our purpose. Wc meant
just what wesaii—no more and no less—and
wc have nothing to explain. Our words are
plain English words, written in their current
acceptation, and are without “questionable
tone” or “dubious shape.”
We resent and repudiate the insinuation
conveyed in Mr. Stephens* ivspurs**. It L
not our habit to “indirectly nsa tit” tinder
“seeming vl dication ” and least of all to
play this hypocritical role to ’*<& ally and a
friend.
It has been our fate to differ with Mr.
Stephens on some question j of party poll y,
and Hits difference w« invc nat herilfttcd to
express emphatically but courteously. And
when we differ again, and think it proper to
stale tho difference, he will remain in no
doubt as to offr utpaning. ^
It is a little remarkably to us ih.-iS Air.
Ji.msof dollar?,or ilie c^'.ilviilant thcretorc,I mcut °f l‘to owa -views. He does statue
to a riii" of speculators and adventures, are not prepared to do yet, in indorsing Judge
The Radicals may look after their own black I Davis as a Republican “whom the Inn- friends
everywhere could
Qbioqay every Democrat who voles in favor I su PP ort -
of ibis hi!!, or who absents himself vyhenthel ^\ r t- have read considerable to please u; so: ( - 4 e
vote is taken vyilhoti) a iegilHDate excuse. w ith Judge Davis and the ftoprovat ,.t Mr.
Stephen, has had no little agency in this re-
when we fiuti n Democrat in league with| su ”- But we want to hear more stu! before
thieves and swindlers, lie deserves lo be I wc can give hint such indorsement ns Mr.
shown up in his true colors. This will ecr- Stephens does. Judge Dnvis isa Republican
tamly be done, so far us tue Democn.tl.* cor-1 n(n/v , h _| . , .
respondents in Washington have the p ,wer ^ “ *1? an ardcnt Iong ‘
to do it. time Republican. Yet Mr. Stephens, who
PEESOKAU AND POLITICAL NOTES. I 113 to tas ^ for Urgiug that OU^
Senator Schurz is very enthusiastic rc- j Norlheni Democratic friend# be let nitinc to
spcctiug the Cincinnati Convention. Up 1 fight their local battles on any issues they
thinks Grant may he heateu wi^h grpvtosse. picked, even the New Departure heresy.
M? M^JTdS; *<*«» wedid not indorse, has jumped cie^
Senator WiLon says he has tbe wide track 1 over oi:r head and Indorses a zealous lone*
for the place, aud it is behoved he has. I time Republican office-holder as one “ whom
Mr. Peters* resointiy respccllng the Ala- , be lrue ftien<ls of con^rational liberly
bami claims is believed to be a feeler tlirown I . ,. „ '
out by the Admiuistratinn with a view to I everywhere could support. •
abandoning the claims f*>r indirect damages. I If this is not “progressive,” and does not
The statement of the National Republican I falsify the Patriot's charge, wc are sadly in a
of tlih city that Mr. Sumner had abardoned VCIy hoacst mistaka It js lru „ M SlPphcns
lus opnosiiion to»Grunt,and would support! . . . *
him for the n'mination, is a 6hecr fabrica-1 s P°* ie Mr. Davts m conn^^tto.n v. no the
lion, isnving no foundation in fact. I alleged machinations of Democratic h-ad^rs
It is said Andy Johnson will run for Con-1 to get the Cincinnati Convention to nomi-
“ te * K'TZT'? T 1 not
eut Cohser;vutlv?Senator from .Tennessee, is I nMUl 09 JudR® Davis; but tho eoiineetlon
of little m'ofe use llian*a mummy. I does not in the slightest degree affect the un-
The Cincinnati Convention is looming up qualified indorsement of Davis.
more and more daily. It will certainly be n I Wn _ „„ OT . ... c , . -
grand demonstration against this rotten ad- ® ake no q°ft*rel with Mr. Stephens for
ministration. Indeed, the fear Is expressed I sucl1 mdoreeraent It is hti right to so in-
iu some quarters that tlic liberal movement I dorse, and his indor. enient utrr?i”» treat
may assume such proportions as to induce weight. But if there is anyassni’t to the
the Philadelphia Convention to drop Grant! ; , *. 1 .
and nominate a ticket that will harmonize 9 atement of the indorsement, he is r» spons.-
r the party. Jn that eftsc the Democrats would j Wp, uot The Constitution.
being frcciy used,'ana we^are cierrcd with have a hard row to hoo. ' I We do, however, question the good policy
the hope of good crops, resulting from’im- The South Carolina delegation.to the Phtla- l 0 f constantly teuuting the many worthy,
proved culture and ihc liberal use of fertili- delphia convention 1ms arrived here for the , Democrats who advocated .h-Now
!L„ Yonrs &c„ purpose of urging the President to remove i*ui«ush. w^q %uvovaica in-.jscw
i-i 'ni pi the present collector of the port of Ch'.rlcs-1 Departure, and keeping that sore fresh, es
i-leaoiugn. ton and other Fcdcnjl officials in South yaro- j pccially when the taunts come from those
. , -S?, .. Una. It to understood these removals will be J ^_i, 0 indorse Remihiicm nmepju.t.w- ..
It is. estimated that there are oyer uO.OOfl ma d B a condition of tlie support of the dele-1 , . P „ ’ ^
canary birds brought to this country every „, tion for Grant’s rcnominalion at Phila- worthy of support. Degrees in Democratic
year. 3elphia. departure may be proper to establish, but it
“ Come out here and I’ll lick the whole of Both Houses of Congress seem to have I strikes us to be to bad grace to keep np an in-
yon.” said a newspaper boy to some sticks of fairly settled down to business, though it to 1 teraeeinc warfare between those di feiinn
peppermint in a confectioner’s wmdow. yet doubtful whether we a J a to haye a tariff I , . ln »
... A feu- vear old hov to Alabama being asked hill this session or not.' Utheadjoumroenl on 'T ma 5 1 ^®-
yield to the stern mandate of the buy. The , ... aAi* r if he would likbto have wings takes place before the Philadelphia Conyeu-1 We are fop keying party divisions, and
3137th and 2133th sections, of the Code » 2d be an angel, replied: 5 No on, I’d rather
I declared hy the hill t.> « luun this fundslioul'd
go. The bill, as pt-.’i'i-hcd bv you, does not
so declare, but would so.dcchiro if the billl
slctdd.be amended, \vnon il provides that
restitution sha-1 be made hy athliue the words
“ to the producer." . ’ ;
If il is true that Ihe re ,*l|.:s ami entries in
revenue bouks are In favor of parlies other
than tire* producers; When the producers nc-l
titally paid tlie taxes, this bill should notstop
at making ih-te receipts0& entries conclu
sive aeains’. the gavt romqBl bulsh- old be so
sra-tided as to prove Umt-soeh Receipts nnd
entries shall insure to th- hemfit o! the pro
ducer, unleca II sh .11 affirmativoiyappear that
the parties .holding thetcceiris, or in whose
favor tho entry to nude, paid thetaxesfor
th" producer and has not been repaid the
same in any manner.
| Th'souiiucudinents would protect oil the
Ipsrtivs, pnsince. (t»mmi. : sion merchant, or
oilier parties holding the receipts.
If Congress to 11 Invc tiu-credit of making
I'l.iu tloiiittiori, let it go lo the parties who arc
lied |o il-r-ul'- pThduOtr.
mendnwnt- tndicat, <1,1 tan give
loostupitort jtaj'iopt the ainend-
iatm
illy <
>biU a 7.r
•tits, I cU
I Slave resorted to j
SCriUMon atld o U ',-c !.v.«id-
w;lV« v: W ; u, o 'iieii'.u of ft,* A;
interests of tho produefj *~ J
Very respectfully,
tiih’t a’v’t,
V A". T. MacItflVEE.
A State Ku.KInx Trial.
Daetos, Ga., April 15,1872.
Editor* Constitution: Last week, during
the session of the Superior Court of this
(Whitfield) county, we bad a Ku-Klux trial,
conducted, not after tlie South Catolina fash
ion, but according tc the law of the land.
It seemed tlict so;p.“ time last fall a party
of disguised tuen visited tbe house of a Mr.
Nance, who lives in the lower part of this
county, hut did no imtm save to frighten the
women and children to a considerable ex
tent. . .'.
Five gentlemen of Ihe neighborhood, who
were known rcheto, were accused and sworn
to hy the prosecutor end family; and the
grand jury of last conrt promptly found a
true bill against them. At this term at the
court, four of them (tlie fifth not being in the
State) were put upon their trial.
I have never seen n criminal case tried, to
which grrajer exertions were made to
convict. The Solicitor General put forth
his whole strength. Counsol voluntari
ly assisted him. Every man, woman
and. child, who had' heard any of the
accused say one word, either before or
after tlie event, that could, in the remotest
degree implicate them, were hunted np and
sworn. Twenty witucsscB in all were exam
ined for tho Stale. But, after it all, the
A nit:II 31BF.T1NO.
Kadlcol re nice Holders In Council.
Fallon County Federal ClHco Holder*
ttnanlmonn lor Grant.
A Radical esthtttar took p’.icc at the City EiH
Monday nlykt la the Connell Chamber. Tho room
heint quite immll »u well fitted. Krtry Federal
offlee bolder In Atlanta, n few nhltrs, sod a Inge
emean** of negroes sesemhted. At 8 o'clock tho
meet!tic woo csUed to order hy W. denntofie. United
Volney Spalding, Erq_ moved tint Henry P. Far
row. United Statu District Attorney, take the chair.
R. T. Simona,* laboring man. moved that “ayoong
man hy the name ot Rnckaf ri!er“ take Hie chair, bnt
waa aquelched by United Stales Araeaaor Jcnntnge,
who decided that United Statee DlaUlct Attorney
Fame waa elected Chairman, trough the vote
•banded etrongiy In rivor of EockaMter.
W. Markham moved that United State* Aaresaoa
Jennings and Wm. Finch, colored, ho Secretaries.
Much confusion took place, about two hundred vocif
erating at once
James Atkina, of tho Savannah Custom House,
moved that a committee of five be appointed to pre
pare but area for tbe meeting. More corfualou.
R. T. Simons made a tpeech severely denuacta-
tnry of alt ode* holder*, and those prelent ln pertie-
nler. Muchcournslon.
The Chair decided Mr. Akins’ motion Carried.
Jno. L. Conley moved a reconsideration. SU.lmoro
JamcaX. Dunning, United States roitmarter, mad*
a long speech enlogtrtic of offlco'holders in general,
aad Unltad Statee Dtatrlet Attorney Farrow In par-
•■cnlar.
United Statee Dtetrict Attorney Farrow announced
the following as a bnllneee committee:
James Atkina, Collector of Posterns it Savannah;
Jams* Dnnntag, Aesiatgnt Uulted Statas Poatmaater,
and Democrat; \clsey Spalding, office holder In
prospective; Mitchell Caryyte, and WlUiam rtnch.
I*rR(msMFNTs. — Messrs. McMillan A
Snow w ill 8ooa bcfilo the erection of a three story
hHrk *tore on liarietta rtrect, neat to BoUd-
Mr. OnGlTce, wo learn, will erect a new bnUdlng
the above and the Opera lienee, incmalc*
ihe capadtj of the Utter more than **oab!e.
Marcan A. Bell has erected a coey and unique two
ctcty brick store, on the comer of Bread and Mariet-
streets.
Major VT. B. Cox ta frcctlo^a new ma&rton at tho
comer of Ivy and Baktr etreeta. It will coat between
$12,003 and $13,C00.
Junes I-ynch, hr, ba* remcred tbe old atore a* tbe
corner of Whitebait and liontrr ttrectf, and will re
place It with a first clave three etoiy brick store.
J. C. Peek ACo. will apoa erect a plaiting milf at
Ibe comer of Loyd and Ballroad rtreeta at a coat of
$75,000.
The atorea In the Anatoli Bai’dlng, comer of Pryor
and Decatur streets, have been restod,we learn, to dry
goods merchant*—one from Chariest on, and one from
New York.
Nashville Indu 6T2iial Expoanox.—We
have been favored with a call from Mr. Wm. II. Mor
row, of the Board of Managers of the Nashville Ex-
poeition, who vHU tmr thriving dtj In tho lnterreta
of the above wamad enterprise. Mr. Morrow desires •
to have our ma-jufacturm to tend epeclmcxa of their
handiwork to Nashville, and will remain in the city
to-day for that purpose, lie will call on as many of
them as possible and fcti headquarters while here will
bo at Cox Cs Htil*a atefe. H*lf fare and hair freight
arrangements have been tfftc'cd with tho railroads
Ring out from Atlanta, and thjrftapm*»ia«B0Q:fc»
—•» -oQWln^ -*-*ra jf«>r vialti.-q ai ( «
osw devr-ibg efet^shv *£>**«*. The Expoat-
1 commences May let, and ends a/ane lat, and tick-
will be good during the entire month. We hopo
Atlanta wUl he the Burner City of the Sonth In this
enterprise. It promises to be a grand.alTdr,
Meeting to Reorganize the Gate Or it
Guards.—A meeting was heJd last eight at tbe ha!l of
tho Chamber of Commerce to reorcanixo tho Gate
City Guards.
On notion. Major A. Leyden was called to the
Chair, and J. Thompson, Jr., requested to act us Sec
retary.
Some thirty-five members were present
Tbe following committee were appointed to ea'ldt
the name* of persona wishing to connect themselves
with the company In Its rc-organlxatlon:
Gen. O. T. Anderson, W IX Lowe, Warren Jocrdan,
W. H. Patterson, M. H. McWhorter, Albert Howell,
T T. Cooper, and Major A. Leyden.
When a snfBdent snu ; or of ratuct have been go- "
cured, the chairman will call a meeting.
Alabama and Cuattakoooa Railroad.
We team tromOaLN.J namaomt, Atlnmey asne-
ral at Georgia, who has Jnat returned from a vlalt to
Dale ;rounty, that .the cases la Dale Fnperior
Court again*t the Alabama anl Chattanooga Railroad
were not trleJ.oa account or the bankruptcy pre-
cccltpga la Alabama. The State or Georgia Indorsed
the hauls of this roal for come $200,003. Th* road
owestolhecittxras ot Dade county tor work, etc
about **00,090; end they tried to collect their claim*
by ordinary suits. Tho State oI Georgia Is not a
party to the litigation, bnt la interested In the road.
Cot. Ilamnionl went then to look after tbe later-
eats of the State.
t Asothsr Editor Qokb.—Major Chsrieo
accused gentlemen proved by incontroverti-1 k- McGregor, editor of the Waiveaton Clipper, waa
Me, uninipencbsble testimony an n'.ibi, and "“"ledonthelOthto Mias Mary Lon Roberta, or
were, therefore, found "not guilty.” I Warrenton.
3437th
lates to the acts of the testator himself, and
as to what was his intention in tbe perform
ance of tlifise net; in regard to t)te revoca
tion of his will.’ The acts of a testator to
regard to the revocation of his will and what
was ills intention in tho performance of those
acts, is one thing; the declared will of the su
preme power of the State as to what shall
constitute the revocation of a testator’s wilt,
is another, and quite a different thing; the
one to controled by the testator’s intention,
tbe other to controled hy the law of the State
without any rpjf.vd to the testator’s intention.
— - itfon oT
tion, it is not probable ’any measures of tj;e | warring on the enemy. Wo have enough
be aliawk^nd Yive’on chickens. kindcanpass; but many now think the ses- there to engage ns.
An able bodied North Carolina negro s.on wffl he protracted utta mntoummm'
showed Lis contP'niit for cooking bjr bolting 40J4T P .. | PJiJ r ^ B, . one o{ c ^ 5tors
two dozen raw eggs, shells and afl, and wash- • I An( ^ Proprietors of The Atlanta'Comstitu-
cd them down with a pint of raw whisky. Agricultural item*. t*on, ia prommentiy mentioned in connec-
A lady of Boston seeing among the re- TllC goo Q farmer is proved such by the from Fulton OJunty.^Co^Clarkc S’canaWe
;ious notices that a certain clergyman would I —1 ™ . . 7*. . iC
ligioua
preach, U D. V.
’ said at once that she would
steady expectation ot his crops.
*ifi'™,r-~_7'±xSb*5 4Uity r offgffS
The card of th- Ilo
Rtprcwoutire In Congress from the Savan-
. . . I cord. Code, suction 2^51 1 parol or in writing,
wheat and tobacco crops were m large ac-l Let the judgment of tha o>sjrt be reversed. 1 fiagc, or even by a settlement on the wife,
ficicocT I E. H. Poitie for plaintiff in erro*. j and a renunciation l«y her of all interest in
This season to late hut with the prospect C. S. DuBoec.CarswcU * Denny, asirira. the t»satc of the hnshand, unless the declare-
inis siasoa is i»ie, un ■ I lions or piwtstons be testamentary in their
ot good weather and both a wet and worm I Ijmnj . mi _ Qn (t ^ v. A. Bell, ad-1 character, and be eseented hy the testator
spriag, sines the winter boa been cold and I m joutran*. Appeal from Conrt of Onli- with the forms and solemnities required for
«lrv. the firmer eon feel encouragement, and I narv. from Morgan. m tiling a w ill. .
below on on appeal from the Court of Onli-1 testing eianip declaring it a will, and reciting
t. T. nelnryve'. Card Aboatl It appearefrom the record that Moul-1 its execution accordmg tc the terms of the
rise canon Tax Bill. j dint ito^sate ip August, 1863 leavtog a suttee, pointing opt howwUto ehatlhe e?e-
A T MrTntvve I widow and sis children, four of whom were I cated. If it be subscribed hy the testator, to
A T. McIntyre, I tanner wife, and two by the wife 'irtog tbe presence ot the witnesses.and be attested
. _. „ I at the time of hu death. In April, 1863, the I and subscribed by them to tos presence, it is
nsh DUtrict, explaining his position on the I widow ot Jloultrie died iote*Ute.«nd Reid | snffldeiu. ,
rnfovi Tar Bill will he found in another I waa appototad silminitrator on her eatute. I 3. If a testamentary paper he pro7Pn by
Cotton Tax ht.l, wtu be lounu m an u. I dfed wW>iil ,j, e Ume jUowed tor the witnesses to have been sutocribed by the
I law for making her election to take a child*| te?tator in their presence, and they further
U i* arc dt*pasod to think that he w wrong J n o{ Ul - re3i j c of her deceased hua-1 that they signed as witnesses, lmme-
in srtkioff to restrict the benefits of ibe tell 1 band in lieu of dower, and without haying I diately thercaCt^, but they are wffile, from
,n ' 1 ich an election The court decided want of rccdlkctUm, to «4At£ affirmattvely
mat in the UL-trilutionof the real estate of J whether the testator remained in the
- - 1 1 — —' *■—r were subscritHng, and
i have elapsed, there is a
nunons mv | **•!te.esta.’ton, that it wm d5| f SS*Sd. a^d ft
era, and we would have their interestsute 1 Ih^ ^jg^^winn ,etal ,»thGa,Rep., «r as efroria^it court to charge the jurylhat
5 of 118D The decision of the court in that esae tMa^matfptknrdM JKn arise, unless tbeliat-
I controls the queetiou made by the record ini testation cladfie Tecited tho pretence of the
•his case.- Drt the Judgment of the ceortbe'j imttlot dating tfce*u? *" ,I1J
low be reversed. ■• - • • “
A. G. & F. C. Foster; for plainti|h in error.
McHenry A McHe&ry, contra.
The intentiori oT th’e tes^tor vauuot oyer-
ride the law or repeal it.
In this case there are no children born sub
sequent to the marriage and the wife is es
topped by her ante nuptial contract from
claiming any part of the testator’s estate in
the event of a revocation of the will, but
that does not alter the law. The children of
tbe testator born before making the will his
heirs, are not estopped from claiming the
benefit of the law and are now before the
mar- court demanding its judgment that an in
testacy shall be declared in their favor on the
ground that tbe testator married after mak
ing his will in which no provision is made ip
contemplation of such an event *The law
is in their favor and they are entitled to have
it administered by the courts and an intes
tacy declared in pfrodience to tbe require
ments of that law. Holliman et ai'. vs.
Copeland and wife, l r th Georgia Reports 79.
The law as prescribed by the 2441st section
of the Code in relation to the revocation of
a testators will, is a public law of tbe
Stale, an universal rule, that regulates the
conduct of the whole community, including
the testator as well ss all other persons, it de
clared to him in plain, explicit terms, that if
he m*de a will in which no piovision was
mad# ;n contemplation of the event of a sub
sequent marriage, and after *be tusking of
such will, he should marry, that such murri-
are should be a revocation of liia will. The
must defeat the bill. It may be that some I lbe pj^ute, that the admigUua&or 1 pot whilst they
turn are «pec«i.ittng in this thing, but we do I Q f ^ widow wo* in titled to receive one I seven w eight rr*rs .
know that millions are doe Southern plant-1 share—that is to say, one*»eyeBtu part Ua^eof-1 pmBpjtioB 0 ! law, as«npg frpm the f.ac* of
g^od op?: I was once teaching in a qn
» ictiicsuuh o* iiu* i us. country villagc The second morning of tim
testator oBld not ..ter or change U* roieof
4* by bis
sngaageoi
do tbit, tbst
not, do it” 1st Bl. Com. 45. Tbe design
and object Of all laws is to ascertain what to
•erred. Wc still believe tbe me)
Justice to the Sooth.
Spices —A telegram from Singapore states I
tbe price of block pepper at $14 50 perpecnl.
• figure never reached before. Telegrams I
• fr.HU Calcutta atoo advise of higher rates for | — _ .
Buffer. As yet thrae advices have bad no I Francis D. Clark ys. George D. Chapman and
eff. ct on this market than to moke holders I tbe Central Railroad Company, Garnishee,
'more confident. Price, remain unchanged I GarnisUmenl, from Richmond.
-The transactions fr.mi first hands hare been I HcCAY, J. . _ ,, „
tyerr light, there being apparently not mnch I The Central Railroad and Banking Cam-
'destre to sell on the ooe hand, or joy on the I pony cannot be served with .summons of
jpt. Jr—X>u Tort Grocer. I garnishment by serving any an* ot it» agent*.
4. Where there is" on erroneons charge
given to the'jury • new trial ought to Be
granted, unless the evidence is so decidedly
in fsvor of ih* verdict, that the jury must
have found Ihe same verdict even if tbe law
hod been correctly charged.
Judgment reversed.
L uton Stephens, Peeples & Stewart, Reid
& Morton, for plaintiff? tof'error.
B. Toombs,/. D. Malhftvtggbrtifl,'
Le t no ons say, after this, that there is
any necessity for a Ku-Klux law in Georgia,
or that justice will not be meted out to all 1
alike, without respect to “race, cuior or pre-1
vious condition.” p. |
News by Telegrapb, ,
Washington, April 10.—In the House, a
Committee of Conference was ordered on the
hill for transporting mails.
Joy to them is liks the springing.
Of tbs blrdling’s chon] swell—
Sweetly wild, sod softly ringing
With tbe merry msrrisgn bet!:
And when round tfcrm ssoly Huger
shadows of tbe lerely flown.
Sorrow's puls sod terr-dewwl finger
- Writes noon them—“Ye ste oni."
As on earth, no in lb* heaven.
Shall their spin;* be bet oss I
Accident on the Atlanta and West
Podtt Railroad.—Tii j pstscocer tisln on the Allan-
Tho 8l Croix Railroad grant was defeated I taand ^ r «iFoL»i Railroad, do* her* at L50 r. su
bv a vote of 110 to 64. yesterday evening, did not reach here until« ». lass
,,, I night. The detention wss cursed by aasccident 10
The River and Harbor bill gtvta $40,000 It shout Ihirtyon* mties from thl. elty. ne nj a
and the uuexpircd npproprintionnf 1«71 to ran into* crowd of enttie, nnd* boll g£ betaranntt”
the t’hHrtcston harbor, and $30,0CO for im- eowdateber mid track, e^n* the
provemi ill of the Savannah river and harbor. I toba espeised *
The Mil prepared by Reprrscnutire Kelly.
was totiay ordered prmted. is on-1 pec m
and which .
titled an act for Ihc further reduction of tax-
ation and the promotion of commerce, and to JB1 .
designed to be offered as a substitute for tlie r -. .71
tariff and tax bill reported Lwiay from the 1 5 ” M,lxJ " r ‘'
Committee on Ways and Mesne.
Mr. Maynard unites with Mr. Kelly in this 1 t-dse"^”,^'
i.uaitm mvpntmir llif* nrdi>p nf il.n I J
The engineer and fiieman reccivsd slight brnltef, sad
are on duty today. This talk* first strident uitlmt
and patriotic, and aside from the fact that he
measure, reversing ihe order of the Commit
tee of Ways nnd Mc^ns.
Fulton Superior Court.—Tho jury yes-
rdsy in the cose of Whitaker, for nee, etc., vs.
Pope, rendered * verdict for th* ia the inn
?he subject of the'discourse was “Dolly Var- capacity ot . .«m u»a to 1 lion with credit to himself, htoednstime^,
dens. Each year of n farmer’s devotion to liis I and the State.—itetaanoA A’oes.
The Chicago Times says when a man sp- homestead may find it more ya)ub!e, more The above comnliment to one of it.er.ro
oliea far a situation as switchman on the attractive than the last, and leave it bitter . , ,' C ”P' lment to . onc ,° r >' ie rro-
Slicliigan Central ttaiiway, Itrestdent Sargent gtifl. 1 •** “ ‘ I pnetors of The Constitution, tlic .
shoutsout through the tube to Tito: “Any n,enrilcleI cMef sarreptitimtiiy rcuro^iaa, as an evi- service so far as ast*es!
switchman killed lately?" That settles the Thcrc me P fSSerc who LaypI<*** ^ appreciation outside of the city.
applicant toiled constanlh’ frojn tisj brwk »° tiark, yet But ho .s no candidate.
During Ihe conf'Tejice at ^VTorc^ter pooF| because’, throiigh ignorance, they I ■■* »
following dialogue was overheard between nought to disadvantage. I Georgia Teacherri A*«ccIation
two newsboy*; “I any, Jim, what8 the , . I —
meaning of roroany ministCTsbcIng here tel .Maxims FoaFttOfran.-Only good Jura-1 We have before us the program:^ of the
c of Ways and ileqna. Kelly’s hill gives
c preceite^c; to the totemal revenue fea- rTsta
iurp instead of the tariff feature. It provides . v
a uniform tox of sixteen cents pe r pound on | re *P° ct 10 ^
toimcco, and a consolidated tax of aixty-five 1 1001110X7 or Csoamas,
oents on spirits* i*tt ftholiaJiea the tax on sales 1
on Loth spirits and tohacca Tbs changes
Sperm | Lubricator.—Kellogg’s “Sperm
l tX b “toey‘slwaS meTo"« oV^7r“uX‘^I sixth annual meeting oj toaiy. The.tot
change sermons with each other.” ter earn wages of some capable neighbor | of papers, addresses and discussions is very
= ■ <■ » than work for so poor a pa-mSSter a» h® •* I inviting, and we doubt not tbe meeting vril;
Enough fob Me —“What do yon do with; certain to prove himself. I be very interesting and nrqgtahjy tq thp
cuts mottier to tell ail your trotiplea to ?" The good farmer sells mainly such pro- teachcm ot the State. R w'ilt beheld iitAu-
a-ked a child who had a mother of one who ... i„... „.i...,.,;..„ 'a i«..t »n.T 1 r . . - .. w 7^“ _
hid none. Her mother was dead.
.Mother fold me who to go to before she
died,” answered tbe’orphan. “I go to thi
Lord Jesus Christ. He was my mothePi
friend, and He is mine.”
“Jesus Christ is up In tbe sky; he to away
off. and has a great many things to attend to
to heaven. It is not likely He can stop *-
mind you.”
“I do not know anything about that,” said
the orphan; “all I know to that He says He
will, and that's enough for me."
from odor or pra, aad to endnre is sold a tempera.
It makes provisions for the maintenance of 1 tnr ' “ th ® ffmmlM sperm. W* hsv* triad It, and
tobaeco b nded wa ehof^ts undersach rerru-1 brandIttohe^K.”
1 itinns ns may Us prescribed hy tlie Sr cretary I „ _ __ T ••• — , „
of Ite Tseasco', »ud abolishes about one-1 Estate Items.—Colonel G. W.
half oi the slights included in fcthodule B. I • 0,d 1 hestaers let on Broad street S3
The tariff siciion adds IQ* and coffee to! f“tfront,«r«tdeep, to Broombesd & xkxsndec
(lie free lis 1 , togcUife with other articles »'**».«* cash.
which enter teto general consumption but I CotooriAdrir sold st private rale jesterdsx a bride
tse not priHluecd in tliifi purterv. It also l ‘tera on PracMroe rlrert,(oceoptad t>j Priet ss a sbo.
add 4 the lOperccnt. reduction ot the Senate I * !oTe . ) hekraxtof to L. Beoltld. E*q, to J. A. Tsmer
on iron and the manufacture thereof, of I Iat * 1 r °f Alstama. for tlo,ooocsth. *
woolen, worsted, cotton goods and some other
A Fine Daikt.—Atlanta at length has a
t measure makra a reduction of I rest anmbsr one dairy, whose proprietors inrrish n
raTv he l"ro 5 .mh of,-tok. Th. iradtag pramtetre
■S|S2!S*ailSZlljiriS2K|^J^!^?KS.£SSl!J5i , W.5aL , S2i2’ ii ’ i “w
Prof. E.G. Moore, of Atlanta; Hon H. W. h.oqrs to-day,nil the mrnibcre IMng present!
taiscellaneor.s.
Virginia has 80,409 farms. _
There are i,4f»S medical students in Lon: I Atlanta; Secretary'of’the Assoidation.
don. 1
, , . . „ .. . „ . ' The State PressAssociation of Texas meets
HT" A school-master tells the following ^th of Hay.
We annually import coffee to the value of
*20,000,000.
There are 3,000 confirmed users cf opium
in New York city.
The University of VIrfln|t),
The names of t«e following young
J was the relation of 4 telegram from’ General I loilngto tv. Markham, xs,” to j.c. Pe^JcT
-j Sheridan to ihe eri'trti.ry of War rjmounc-| fof*»l,«0. This Is a praetietl demonstration or u#
gtif that thirty-five |>r:vaies and aeven officers 1 tnerraring votne of real estate in Atlanta.
of the Juarez parly had crorae t the river. —
r " T !j ® y _ !' ir 'L, " d taken to Son I A Veteban Gone.—On the lith instant
were re- I Jacob Bora dial of appoplexy at Llthoota, seed *
tost, honorable, and expedient, and when that
is discovered by the law-making power, it is
proclaimed as a general rule of conduct,
equally binding and impartial tp all. The
Judges of the courts are not “ chartered liber-
tinea” to defeat and destroy the effect of s
plain conftitteional law by construction, to
§nit their notions of expediency;' their dnty
is to administer and enforce it, when its terms
and meaning ore clear and explicit.
The real question to this case is between
tbe children of the testator by a former mar-
riagejlegklWMinder the will, wLo ore cavea
tors, and tltejhnpounders of the will They
allege thattoBb will was revoked by tbe mar-
Tbe dork eyes sparkled, tbe curls nodded
assent, and the lip3 rippled out, “ I guess so.
The teacher always sita on it”
tWThe “HeathefeChiVse” hoi been tried
and found wanting. ANnost all the planta
tions on which John was employed ore DOW
rid of his presence—the drean» of his superi
ority oss field, hand having vanished, and
those who were so sanguine of the success cf
John Chinaman os a competitor with our
co’Ared population awakened to the sober
fact that he ts a fraud. Parties of three or
four of these discharged Chinese may fre
quently he seen traveling in scBrshiot’Rnploy-
ment, but their services do not appear to be
in great demand.—-Empire Parith Btyider.
. ... ....... .jO H.
- *
tinmen, from Georgia, are enrolled on the Antonio, wlierc lie: p-ivstu- w
ss4s»— “ -r - ——
Boston ore women.
Thu Queen of England keeps two dtxen
physicians tohbr'hoqse'tsld,
Four hundred women of Utah have sent a
memorial tp Congress protesting against the
admission of thg-Tcnttoiy as a State.
Cpnnndrwzw*.
If a porter-house steak could speak, what
poet’s name would it utter? Chaucer.
A young woman’s conundrum: Who to our
favorite Roman hero? Marius.
What is the difference between a brewer
and a flea? One buys hops, and the other
takes hops. . > • •
vjfdso i~
yanUAil , y..is«liuvs, VWMSJSJ I tionerai, v?
^ub«f£ewUHl^ 1 .: ^Sted. ?w2S i ^Ta„^v> U The°UW^ C 1 “Z CharlcS °’? onD0 ^.
7=0S*“b nol « was I ctrating eye, an aquiline nose, mobile month.
Title; Joseph Printup, Home; Edward Woslrej
burn, Savanah,„ Jnwl) there are ejtren.
not teluded to to the eburof of offlci.1 bu»T ‘ totellroS forchead, he
nc« before the i^ninet to-dny. I looks tbe able man he is. His conver.ation,
16.—The Dispatch of I like hto oratory, is weighty and impressive,
"’CbaSLOTTE, Xp
tWIt is relateflqlut.wt»itojai*aa -Rusaelb »
Lowell wss but tn’Rotocra meirditsbt monk t
met the poet in the Coiso one day, and asked 4ng <
for a contribution to repair:icrmontstery.
“Von should not ask me- for aid," remarked
Lowell, in choice Toscan. ‘Tor Uni heretic.”
“That makes no difference,” replied the estate
friar, “your money is orthodox” The poet
appreciated the witticism, and mode the con- only to terrify him. The squod'Va's 'under I after ids name so hc’may not bcmbuk£ for
tribution asked for. It —. trpommand of Lieutenant Benners. I tbe Almighty." 4
ibis city wiH to-morrow contain the follow- and is often enlivened Ly crispy and orieinat
tog account of a military outrage in Soulli I expressions. When roused Ly the assaults
Csroltna: The totter part of lost wock a of an opponent, his wit can bur : t as well ss
squad of Federal cavalry shot and killed n flash. A lawyer from the country, entering
rastr countryman by thenameof Paris while I the Court of App als, asked him who w«s
fl'biug in a btstt on Broad river, in York I addressing the court. Hia reply was. “Tn-t
district. The soldiers allege that they shot I is Daniel North, Jr., and he pu'ts the Uia"
