Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

V Agents. J. W. HEARD, •HE ATLANTA SUN KDER H. STEPHENS, Political Editor. „ WATSON. News Editor. gENLY SMITH, General Editor and Business Manager. Traveling U. W. HILL, Agents for the Sun. Lot Allen Smith, Knoxville, Tenn. |Tts Bell, Athena, Ga. Tl. Weight, Woodstock, Ga. [c.CALSvrKLL, Thompson. Ga. t C. Hamilton, Dalton, Ga. G«en CO., Ga. Smith, Chattanooga, Tenn. . Pabham, LaGrange, Ga. L„. Vabhedoe, Th. om *£J^t' G * - r q. Williams, Union Point. THE ATLANTA SUN DAILY and WEEKLY. YOL. 2, NO. 34.} ATLANTA, GA., WEDNESDAY, JANUARY 31, 1872. WHOLE N U M B E B 86. TERMS OF SUBSCRIPTION. Dnlly-singie Copy—Twelve Months, $10 00; Six Months, 5 00; Three Mouths, 3 00; One month, 100. Clnlii for Dally—Per Annum—Three Co pies. $27 00; Pour Copies, 35 00; Fivo Copies, 43 90; Kight Copies, 68 00; Ten Copies, 84 00; Single Copy, 5 cents. Weekly for Six Months—Singlo Copy. $1 00; T^J W L Copio8 ’ 2 601 FiT0 Copies. 4 00; Ten Copies, .60; Twenty Copies. 15 00; Fifty Copies, 34 00; Ono Hundred Copies, 6$ 00; Singlo paper 5 cents. CONTENTS Atlanta weekly sun,” ros the week ending I ivPIDNESPA Y, .1 A 5* 1* A It Y 31at, 1872. Inge Yc Hi rue of Ye Ancient Mariner. The [Missouri Compromise. Radical Politics. Record- ■’« Conrt. , ‘i A Mean Attack on Georgia and Tress- • Angler. Pendleton and Stephens—Demo tic Policy. The County Court. Good Templars. Matters. Ban-Strokes. Local Notes. Telegrams, etc. . a.—Suggestions for Consideration. The Sale of Public Offices. Supreme Court Vacancies. New k Correspondence—The Democratic Platform the Best Democratic Candidate for 1872. A l Between the Single Republic of Romo and be Federal Republic of the United States. Leet, President’s Young Friend. Sun-Strokes. Matters. List of Acts and Resolutions 1 by the Legislature at the late Session, and Approved by the Governor. Another Radical Falsehood Exposed. Death of Dr. Scales, of Gwin nett New York Fashion Notes. Immigration, letc. ■ge 4.—Kimball’s Financiering—More of tho suits. Present and Prospective. Bowdon. Gcor- Matters. Washington Notes. Beautiful and Touching. Shooting of a Negro Legislator by a Newspaper Correspondent Water-Works’ Cele bration at Rome—A Hostof Visitors. The Woman sho Shot Two Men in a Street Car. Cost of Cob Meeting the Revenue. Local Notes. Tho French nblic. Telegrams, etc. 5.—Persecuted Mexico. A Prond and Hon- eMan. Hieroglyphics. Washington Corrcs- ence—Meeting only to Adjourn. Noesltur a -Proud and Honorable Man. Sun-Strokes, To onr Exchanges. Local Notes. Georgia Matters, politics in Mexico. Telegrams, etc. jje O.—Telegrams. From the University—Tho System—Tho New Professor—Important In ^cetigation . Lectures, *c. Sun-Strokes. Wash- ngton-Lce University—Colobration of the Gra- n-Lee University. Washington Matters. What it Mean? Visiblo Supply of Cotton, Made by Cable and Tolegraph. The Confederate jjometery at Marietta. The Secret of Bret Harto’s .itcrary Success. Georgia Matters, etc. 7.—Book Notice. Special Washington Cor- apondence. Agricultural and Horticultural Con Mention. Secretary’s Bulletin. Local Notes. Da- rid J. Meado, Esq. The Bonds of Georgia—Offl- |lal Notice to Bondholders. Sun-Strokes. Telc- , etc. Lge S.—An Interesting Letter from Montana, ommerclal—Advertisements, etc. Written for tho Atlanta Sun. Be £)e ftime Ancient (Carpct'-Baggcr. iXaliek A. IK, 1900.] The Missouri Compromise.” for the admission of the State of Maine, I Many others, of the Strict Construction • Now Rebhy, quit your play, and como nd climb upon your gran'ser’s knee; be sun is sotting, don't yon see? Jis time to stop tbat noisy drum. l top and knife ? ah, whose aro they? fours ? Yes, they are very pretty ones— fou prigged ’em both from Tommy Jones? |Ha! Ua! you mind me of the day When 1 was in my golden prime. And went a-carpet-bagging. ' What’s that ? You do not know, my lad. | ’Twas thirty years ago,.or more; I Your mother was a chit of four, I And was the only child we had. There had been a tremendous war. And many thousand men had died; Some fell jipon tho Union side, And Borne the South-side perished for. But, oh 1 It was a goodly time To go a-carpet-bagging 1 “You see, my boy, these Southern men, I Somehow, grew mad and discontent, When Lincoln was made President; So they seceded. It was then Tho war began. It lasted through Four bloody years, and General Lee [ Fought for the North, and Graut, you see, | A wicked Rebel was. They two Were leaders—’twas a goodly timo To go a-carpet-bagging. ••What is that, mother ? did you say I Lee was the Rebel ? Ah, well, well I It matters not! 1 meant to tell— I'm getting old, you know, and may Forget exactly how things were. And how the generals fought, aud how I The South compelled the North to bow. 1 Eh ?—wrong again ? W ell, this is clear. At least—it was a goodly time To go a-carpet-bagging. “The winter time of sixty-five, I When Johnston marched dowu to tho sob 1 And captured General Sherman, he— [ Still wrontf ? Well mother, sakes alive, I I'm getting old and things will mix, I Some how or other, in my mind. [But I. the army marched behind— | A euttler, with some Yankee tricks, Ah, sure, it was a glorious time I went a-carpet-bagging! The Rebels fled to left and right (Like just so many crazy loons. |You mind you, lad, those silver spoons on stirred your coffee with last night ? ‘ lose pictures on the parlor wall? saddle in the shed, on Grey love to ride so every dsy ?— hat pistol? Yes, I got them all In Georgia, in that goodly timo 1 went a-carpet-bagging. "Timesare not now as they were then. II call you Rebel, do you mind ? I Aud hobby ?—’tis because I find I It pleassnt to call up again I Tue memory of those prosperous daysl lit was, indeed, a golden time; I My life was in its summer prime, I And led me into prosperous ways. oh, but it was a goodly time When I went carpet-bagging. “I held r seat two years, or more, [In Georgia’s Legislature. ’Twas I Rare fan to see ns making laws:— ton thought your grand'aer was a boor. But not a man upon that floor ~ould better draw his pay than I, : gran’aer—I do not deny I sometimes drew a little more— But it was in that goodly time When I went carpet-bagging. us had been hard before the war: [cobbled shoes in Natick then ;— (fas poor among the poorest men, nd many things we suffered for. ut now yon see this farm and he*— neee horses, cattle, sheep and hogs:— be money of thou Rebel dogs [ think has made me pretty rich. I got it in that goodly ti™. When I went carpet-bagging. • little grandson, on my knee, fon*rb ten years old. Yon do not know t gold on bushes does not grow. fou:U soon be older—then you’ll see, Sow fortune often goes amiss, Jideas she's fairly understood. For you, my grandson, if I could, I’d have no better fate than this. That you, in some iair, goodly time, May go a-carpet-bagging." iS f serve It.—We suggest to our read i preserve this issue of The Sun. — lie history of the Missouri Compromise [-called) which it contains will be use- for future reference. The facts there- | set forth are of great historic value, “The evil that men do lives after them,” and political errors often do great mischief long after their day, if not cor rected and exposed. We deem it not inappropriate, there fore, at this time, to prevent serious mis chiefs of this sort by correcting many grave errors on the subject of the famous Missouri Compromise.” The following is a brief, but accurate, history of the nature and character of this “solemn compact,or covenant,” as it has been styled: A Bill for the admission of the State t of Missouri into the Union, came up in the Lower Houso of Congress for action, on the 13th of February, 1819. To this Bill Mr. Tollmadge, of New York, moved an Amendment in these words: “ And Provided, That the farther in troduction of slavery, or involuntary servitude, be prohibited, except for the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been fully convicted; “ and that all children bom in said State “after the admission thereof into the “ the Union, shall be free at the age of twenty-five years.” The announcement of this Amendment produced a great sensation in the House, which soon extended to the country everywhere. It opened anew the ques tion of the powers of the Federal Government over Negro slavery in the States; which had been consid ered as put at rest by the Besolntion of the House of [Representatives of 1790, upon the first petition presented upon the subject. From that day to this movement no attempt had been made in the Congress to bring the subject of Negro slavery, as it existed in the States or Territories, within the sphere of Fed eral Legislation, under the new Constitu tion. Territorial Governments had been instituted in Tennessee, Mississippi, Lou isiana, Alabama and Missouri, without any such claim of power. The States of Kentucky, Tennessee, Louisiana and Alabama, all tolerating Slavery, had been admitted, without any such claim of pow ers. The right to impose the restriction, moved by the Amendment, upon the State of Missouri was denied by the Strict Constructionists everywhere, North as well os South. A bitter debate arose. Although an overwhelming majority of the House claimed to be Republicans, or Democrats, yet, during “the era of good feeling, party lines had not been closely drawn in the late State elections; many, therefore, who had been returned to the Fifteenth Congress as Democrats, or Strict Con structionists, sided on this question with those who held the Centralizing princi ples which had marked the Administra tion of the elder Adams. The question on the Amendment was divided in the House. On the first branch the vote was 87 for it, and 76 against it; on the second branch 82 for it, and 78 against it. The Bill, with the restrictive Amendment, passed the House. The Senate disagreed to the Amendment. The House adhered. So this Bill was lost between the two Houses, The application of the people o% Mis souri was renewed on the 9th of Decem ber, 1S19, on the opening of the First Session of the Sixteenth Congress. To Bill, offered in the usual form for thispur- pose, the same restriction in effect, but not in the same words, was renewed by Mr. Taylor, of New York. This gave rise to a renewal of the conflict of the Session before, with increased spirit and vigor. Never had any discussion shaken the foundations of the Government from its beginning as this then did. It was conflict of principle. The friends of the Constitution and Union under it every where became alarmed. Mr. Jefferson, in his retirement, said the news of this Amendment fell upon his ear as the sound of a fire-bell at night. He was well known to be opposed to Slavery, as it existed in the States, and was anxious for the adoption, by each State for itself, of suitable meas ures for emancipation. But he held that it was a subject on which Congress had no Constitutional power to act; and believed that the whole movement of its introduction into that body was instigated by the arch-leaders of the old Centralizing party, by an art ful appeal to the passions of the people on a popular issue, to ^revive their principles, on which they had been so utterly defeated for years. To Mr. Pinkney, he wrote: “ The Missouri question is a mere “party trick. The leaders of Federal- “ ism, defeated in their schemes of ob- “ taining power by rallying partisans to “ the principle of Monarchism—a princi- “ pie of personal, not of local division— “ have changed their tack, and thrown “ out another barrel to the whale. They “ are taking advantage ot the virtuous “ feelings of the people to effect a divis- “ ion of the parties by a geographical “ line; they expect this will insure fhem, “ on local principles, the majority which ** 4'Kott sasiT-tl/1 rvrrnf rtLfrtin An they could never obtain on principles " of Federalism.” While the discussion was going oe, in the House, on the Missouri Bill, an Act passed that body, on the 3d of January, in the usual form, without any restric tion. When this House Bill went to the Senate, a motion was made and carried in that body, to tack on to it a bill for the like admission of Missouri, in the usual form, without any restriction. To the Amendment thus made, by tacking a Bill for the admission of Missouri to file Bill for the admission of Maine, Mr. Thomas, of Illinois, moved another Amendment in these words: “ And be it further enacted, That in all the territory ceded by Frqpoe to the United States under the name of Lou isiana, which lies north of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes North lati tude, excepting only such part thereof as is included within the limits of the State contemplated by this Act, Slave ry and involuntary servitude, other wise than in the punishment of crimes, whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall be, and is hereby, for ever prohibited: Provided always, That any person escaping into the same from whom labor or service is lawfully claimed in any State or Territory of the United States,such fugitive may be law fully reclaimed, and conveyed to the person claiming his or her labor or service, as aforesaid.” This Amendment passed the Senate on the 17th of February, by a vote of 34 to The Maine Bill, with these two Sen ate Amendments so put upon it, came back to the House on the 19th of February, Its consideration was there postponed. The House went on discussing its own separate Bill, for the admission of Mis souri. Before coming to a final vote on that, however, they, on the 22nd of February, took up the Maine Bill, with the Senate Amendments. They disagreed to both the Amendments of the Senate the one tacking on the Missouri Bill to the Maine Bill, as well as the Thomas Amendment to the Missouri Bill. On agreeing to the Thomas Amendment to the Missouri Bill, the vote in tue House was only 18 in favor of it, while there were 159 against it. They then took up, and went on with, their own Bill for the admission of Missouri, with the restric tion on the State in it. Pending this discussion, still going on in the House, a message was received from the Senate, on the 28th of February, stating that that body insisted on their Amendments to the Maine Bill. This message was taken up, and by a vote of 160 to 14 the House adhered to their disagreement to the ThomasProvision. The House, mean time, went on with their own separate Bill as to Missouri. The Senate asked a Committee of Confeience on the dis agreeing votes of the two Houses on the Maine Bill. This was granted on the 29th of February. But on the same day, the House adopted Mr. Taylor’s restriction in their own Bill, by a vote of 94 to 86; and, with this restriction, passed and sent to the Senate their separate Bill for the admission of Missouri, on the next day (1st of March) by a vote of 91 to 82. On the 2nd of March, Mr. Holmes, of Massachusetts, from the Committee of Conference, on the part of the House, on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses, upon the Bill for the admis sion of Maine, reported. Their recommendation was, that the Sen ate should recede from its Amend ments to the House Bill for the admission of Maine, and that the Honse should strike out the Bestriction as to the State in their separate Bill for the admission of Missouri, and insert in lieu of it the Thomas Provision, imposing the terri torial Restriction proposed. This was the “Compromise” reported. By i^ Maine and Missouri were both to be ad mitted under the separate Bills which had passed the House without any Re striction as to either State; but with the territorial Thomas Restriction, so to bo incorporated in the Missouri Bill. A similar report was made to the Senate on the 3rd of March, which was agreed to in that body with out a count. But in the House the yeas and nays were taken on both propositions of the report. The test vote was on striking oat the Restriction on the State as it then stood in the Honse Bill for the admission of Missouri. On this question the vote was 90 in favor of striking out, and 87 against it; so the Re striction on the State was stricken out by a majority of 3. The question then came np on concurring with the Senate, in the insertion of the Thomas Provision for the future line of division on thirty- six degrees and thirty minutes, North latitude. This was passed bv a vote of 134 to 42. The eighty-seven votes which had been given against striking oat the restriction on the State, were on the last question given in favor of inserting the restriction on the Territory—not as a “Compromise” for the admission of the State without i restriction, but as the next best thing that conld be accomplished on theis un yielded line, as {results showed. The forty-two votes against the insertion of the Territorial restriction, were given by Strict Constructionists, upon the ground that Congress had no more right, under the Constitution, to impose a Territorial restriction than a State restriction.— Party, however, viewing the question in a different light, accepted the Thomas Proposition, aud voted for it, upon the principle of a fair division of the public domain between the two great sections of the Union. By them, in this view, it was agreed to as a “Compromise,” under, the belief that it would be an end of the agitation of the subject; but in this they were greatly mistaken. The result was, that the separate Act for the admission of Maine received the approval of the President on the 3d of March, 1820, and that State was admitted into the Union nnder it on the 15th day of that month. The separate Act in relation to Mis souri also received the President’s ap proval, on the 6th of March, 1820. It was entitled, “An Act to authorize the “People of Missouri Territory to form a “Constitution and State Government, “and for the admission of such State “ into the Union on an eqnal footing with “the original.States, and to prohibit “Slavery in certain Territories. ButMissouri was not admitted under this act. She was denied representation in the Senate and in the House, as a State of the Union, at the next Session of Congress, though her Peo ple had formed a State Constitution and orgauized a State Government, under the provisions of the Act so passed, and in pursuance of the understanding upon which these provisions were based They had, as Maine had, elected Senators and members to Congress, and had voted in the Presidential election of that year. . But on a resolution to allow her representation, on the 13th of December, 1820, the vote was 79 for it, and 93 against it. Of these 93 votes against it, seventy-two were given by the identical men who, on the 2d of March, had voted against striking out the State restriction,' on the test vote in the House, on the Compromise report ed by the Committee of Conference, as before stated; and sixty-seven of them were the identical men who voted imme diately afterwards for the insertion of the Territorial restriction, which was carried by 131 to 42, as stated. This shows that and the Centralizin k . • party with which they acted! never con sidered the adoption of the Thomas Pro vision as “a compromise” for the admis sion of Missouri', without any restriction upon the State. So, Missouri, in point of fact, was not admitted into the Union as State under the so-called “ Compromise. Tho conflict for her admission after its adoption, and her-organization under it, was fiercer at the Session of December, 1820, than it ever had been before. It was at this stage of the proceedings that Mr. Clay threw himself into the breach, and exerted his transcendent powers in efforts at conciliation and har mony. He moved, on the 2d of Februa ry, 1821, that a Committee of Thirteen be appointed to report such action as shonld properly be taken in view of the situation. A committee was raised, and reported on the 20th of February. The pretext for the opposition to the recognition of the State in December, 1820, was, that a clause of the Consti tution of Missouri, about the immigra tion of free Negroes and Mulattoes into that State, was in violation of the Con stitution of the United States. This, however, was nothing but a pretext; for if the State Constitution contained any thing inconsistent with the Constitution of the United States, it was, of . course, inoperative, null and void. The report of Mr. Clay's Committee of Thirteen was in substance^ That Missou ri should be recognized as a State of the Union upon the“FundamentalCondition” that her Legislature should pass no law in violation ot the rights of the citizens of other States; and'that the Legislature should also, by proper Act, give its assent to this “Fundamental Condition,” before the 4th Monday in November nextfensu- ipg;and tba the President of the United States, up-*u she receipt of jthis assent of the Legislature, should announce the fact by proclainatn.u, and then the State was to be considered in the Union. This report was rejectee iy a vote of„80 for it, and 83 agu_ -t it. This shows very con clusively what was the real objection to Missouri at tbat time,:and that the Re- strictionists had not agreed to any com promise of their views upon the subject of slavery, either in the State or Territo ry, by which they considered themselves bound, or intended to abide. The Par ties, in the meantime, continued to stand as they stood at the Session before. The passions on both sides waxed warmer as the conflict was prolonged. The strife was really one between Centralism and Confederation. The rejection of Mr. Clay’s resolution was reconsidered next day; but; when it was again put on its passage, it was again lost, by a vote of 82 for it, and 88 against it Discordant opinions now prevailed as to what was tho actual status of the people of Missou ri, in their relations to the Federal Gov ernment. Some ^ield that they were still eral authority; while others maintained that they constituted an independent State, out of the Union. The withdraw al of other States seemed imminent. Mr. Clay, undaunted by his previous failnr6, again came to the rescue’of the Union. On the 27th of February, he moved that a Grand Joint-Committee, consisting of members of the House and Senate, should be raised to propose suitable action for the alarming crisis.” The Committee, on the part of the House, was to consist of twenty-three members. This was agreed to, and the twenty-three members were elected by the House. The Senate'concurred. The Grand Joint- Committee was raised. Mr. Clay, as chairman of this Grand Joint-Commit tee, on the part of the House, made the report from it on the 26th of February. It was a joint resolution, substantially the same as that reported by him before from the Committee of Thirteen. This resolution passed the Honse the same day, by a vote of 87 .to 81. It was sent to the Senate,'and passed that body the ne:A day, by a vote of 26 to 15; and was ap proved by the President on the 2d of March, 1821. The Legislature of Mis souri readily passed the indicated Act, on the 26th of June thereafter; and on the 10th day of TAiignst, 1821, the President issued his Proclamation accordingly, de claring the admission of Missouri into the Union as being complete. This is the true history of “ the Mis souri Compromise,” so-called, of 1820, from the beginning to the end, so far as related to the admission of Missouri. A general idea prevails very extensively at this time, that Missouri was admitted as a Slave State in 1820, under an agree ment with the Restrictionists or Central ists, proposed by Mr-Clay,that she should be so admitted upon condition that Ne gro slavery should be forever prohibited thereafter, .in the 'public domain north of, thirty-six degrees, and thirty minutes, North latitude. No greater error on any. important historical event ever existed. The truth is, Mr. Clay was not the author of the Territorial line of thirty-six thirty degrees, incorporated in the Act of 1820; nor was Missouri admitted under the provisions of that Act. On the contrary, she was admitted on the 10th of August, 1821, by Presidential proclamation upon the “Fundamental Condition;” in sub stance: That the State Government, in all its other departments, should be subject to the Constitution of the United States, as all the State Governments were, and are. The position of the Restrictionists and Centralists, that the Democratic Party violated a “solemn com pact,” or any compact at all, to which they, the Centralists, had ever agreed on this subject, by organizing Territorial Governments for Utah and New Mexico, in 1850, without regard to the provisions of this Thomas Amendment of 1820, af- terjthe repeated refusals of theRestriction- ists and Centralists at that time as well as before to abide by it, was but adding insult to injury; and fhesame is true of the same position of the same party in their charges of a violation of faith, on the part of the Democracy, in adhering to tho principle acted upon by them in 1850, when they came to estab lish Territorial Governments for Kansas and Nebraska in 1854. The foregoing, as we have said, is a full and accurate history of the “Missouri Compromise” line, so-called, up to the admission of the State into the Union. It is not pertinent to our object, at this time, to go into a minute detail of events attending it afterwards. We will here barely add that, in 1836, the Restriction ists, in a body, refused to be bound by it, or to recognize it, on the admission of Arkansas; though that State was organ ized in territory acquired by the same Louisiana cession; and lay entirely South of the line of thirty-six degrees and thirty minutes, North latitude. They did the same in the admission of Texas in 1845; and the same on the organization of a Territorial Government for Oregon in 1848. They did the same on the or ganization of Territorial Governments for Utah and New Mexico in 1850. It was then, after these repeated and persistent refusals of the Restrictionists or Centralists to be bound by this line of division of the Public Domain be tween the two great sections of the Union, and their unyielded claim of rightful power to put the Restriction upon all the Territories of the United States, South as well as Noi;th of this line, with the expressed determination to carry their policy out, that the Strict Constructionists were thrown back upon their original principle of Non-Interven tion by Congress on the subject, either North or South of any line. The principle of a division of the com mon territory between the sections, which had been attempted to be established in 1S20, was thus abandoned by them; and theprinciple of complete Non-Inter vention under the .Constitution pro claimed. This was the old principle of the Strict Constructionist, re-estab- tablished in 1850, both of the then two great political parties of the country did afterwards, in their General Con ventions, in 1853, pledge themselves solemnly to stand to, and abide by, in the future; and this is the principle to which the Democratic Party did adhere in good faith, in 1854, in organizing Ter ritorial Governments for Kansas and Ne braska. So that it is utterly untrue that the Democratic Party began the agitation of anj of these exciting questions within the periods stated. They simply opposed their agitation all this time. This they did in 1790. They did the same in 1818, 1819, 1820 and in 1821. This they did in 1836, in 1843, in 1850 and in 1854. Our object in this review is not to re new the agitation. All these are among what we freely admit to be “deadissues." Our purpose is simply to vindicate the truth of history; and this wo intend to do under all circumstances to the last. This high public duty neither “prin cipalities nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come,” shall ever prevent us from doing,so long as life ami strength to do it shall permit. When Centralism and Empire shall come, with the peace of Political djath, if such is to.lj6.-Qur ultimate destiny, tho record shall stand for all time to come as a perpetual monument, showing .that the sad catastrophe can never be justly charged upon the Strict Constructionist or tho Democratic Party for anything they did in regard to the celebrated “Missouri Compromise,” cither in 1850 or in 1854. A. H.; S. in a Territorial condition, subject to Fed- j fished in 1850. This principle, so re-es- Recorder’s Court—Panoramic View of the North Pole.—The curtain rose- yesterday morning on one of the most startling panoramic scenes in all nature. Human icebergs stalked the stage with- the demeanor of young continents sports ing on the Arctic Sea. Some of these were anomalies in nature, being tilack as the ruins of Chicago. His Honor exr plained this phenomenon by saying he supposed old master forgot to clarify them. GEORGE DAVIS, through the intercession of a “big man,” was only charged costs for some Sunday misdemeanor. JACOB STAFFORD, walked up to a beef stand, claiming to ne a meat inspector. He wanted to know if the market man had any dog meat. The proprietor picked up his knife, and had not Jacob made a precipitate retreat, he would have added to liis stock a lot of savory negro meat. Jacob cursed $5 worth. JOHN RAMSEY doubtless belonged to an aristocratic family, and.could not compromise his dignity by appearing before His Honor. He sent word he had the “ager” the day before, and pleaded tho following excuse- for his non-appearance : • "And to-day the swallows flitting Round my cottage see mo sitting Moodily within the sunshine • Just inside my silent door, Waiting for the ager, seeming Like a man forever dreaming. And the sunlight on mo streaming Throws no shadow on the floor; For I am too thin and sallow To make shadows on the floor, Nary shadow any more!’’ His Honor thought he could discern a flitting shadow—of some person having been drunk; and as a guess charged John §5 and costs, “scott” was a superannuated negro rebel. While intrenching on the coast he had contract ed brain fever, and had recovered with the loss of his sense of hearing. He was drunk Saturday night, and ran up tho street worse than 17,000 demons ; but he didn’t know he was fermenting a young earthquake % so his Honor dismissed bim with “costs.” OBACIAH LEE claimed to be a relation of the illustri ous deceased, aud affirmed that the spirit of the departed would rise up and vindi cate him. ‘‘Yes,” his Honor said, "I hear it now; And sure his head is level. For he rises up and says as how, You’ve played the very devil; and accepting his admonition I charge you 85 and costs.” An unknown individual, whom John son mysteriously called “No. 56,” sent'a. private telegram to His Honor: “ I went np town on Sat’rday night. To see what I could see; The boys they got me in a fight, And put tho beer on me, I den went home to write mine pies*-, And vile away der time, But that duraed beer, yer Honor see, Has knocked it all to—rhyme!’’ His Honor said poverty was a better- poltice stimulant than beer, and charged him $15 and costs. JON HUZE got so happy in church on Sunday he could not restrain himself. He said he felt so much better there under the soul- inspiring Gospel than he did at the beer- shop, which he had just left. His Honor informed him that shouting at church was a barbarous eastern, and charged him 810 and costs. SOME POETASTER then appeared, and while the icicles formed on the spectators’ noses, sang: •‘And somewhere from over the meadow. On the fitful bree/ts borne, There floats to my ear tho thrilling note Blown out from a distant horn, And a raptur-us soug of thanksgiving Swells up from my heart’s deep core To the giver of stng and sun shine, And summer’s beautiful store. The entire audience, like the desert Cara van chasing the mirage, rushed forth, hoping to revel iu a bright summer’s sun, but—“our hat” took wings unto itself, and we were not able to note any more.