Newspaper Page Text
THE ATLANTA SUN
I>AIX.Y and. WEEKLY
XJiRMS OF 8UBHCRIPTION
Dally—Slngcle Copy >
XwdwMonUii....»10 00 I Three Month* 3 00
Uix Month* 6 00 | Ono Month 1 00
Club* for Dally—Per Annum i
Three Copies 27 00 I Eight Copies 68
Four •* 35 00 Ten " ® J
five « 43 00 I Single o
Weekly—Per Annum» .
Single Copy 2 00 I Ten Copies- 1ft 0
Three Copies 6 00' Twenty Copies..—.28 00
Fire Copies 8 00 TUty Copies ..05 00
One Hardred Copies *• 00
Weekly for Six MontUs s
Single Copy. 1 00 I Twenty Copies 15 /0
-rw v 'yifty Copies M N
- * ’ “ T 00
cts
Single Copy. 1 00 | Twenty Copies lft .
Three Copies 2 501 FiltyCopiCi... ■ •».31 * 1
Fire Conies . 4 00 | One Hundred CopiesBo
Ten Copies. 7 6° I Single paper— 6 c
CON T.i2 NTS
“ATLANTA WEEKLY SUN,”
FOB THE WEES ESDISQ
\VKU.VESDAV, JULY 17th, 1878.
EDITORIALS B7 MB. STEPHENS—
Will the Democracy of Georgia Abandon their
Principles . - page 4
EDITORIALS—
The African Explorer Found, 2; Politics Here and
There, 2; Got. Smith, 4; Tho Fulton County Dele
gation to tho Gubernatorial Convention, 1; Is Mr.
James an Independent Candidate, .8; Important
Political Items,! 8.
DEATH OF HON. LISTON STEPHENS—pages 1
r.nd 8.
POLITICAL ARTICLES—
On the Candidacy of Gov. Smith and Mr. James,
pages 2, 3andC; The Baltimore Convention—Its
l'olly and Shame—IU Work ; Horace Greeley and
the Cincinnati Platform, page 4.
THE STATE ROAD LEASE—
Corresponded between Hon. B. W. Phillips and
cx-Governor Brown, 2.
SUPREME COURT PROOEEDINGS-page 6.
COUNTY MEETINGS— *1
Forsyth, 6; Taliaferro, 8, Screxen, 2.
FROM THE COLLEGES, ETC.
State University, 6; Bowdon, 5; Wesleyan Fe
male, 0; Grantville, C.
SUGGESTIONS FOR PROTECTION AGAINST
FRAUDS IN COMMERCIAL, FERTILIZERS —
pago4.
HISTORY OF THE FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH IN
ATLANTA—page 4.
MISCELLANEOUS—
Recorder’s Court, 7.
TELEGRAMS—3 and 8.
ADVERTISEMENTS—7 and 8.
COMMERCIAL AND MARKETS—8.
Judge Stephens’ funeral will take
1 place to-day. He will be buried at
Sparta, instead of Crawfordville, as we
stated yesterday that we supposed he
would be.
: >-44-4
VOL. 3, NO. 4.j
ATLANTA, GA„ WEDNESDAY, JULY 17, 1872.
WHOLE
NUMBER
101.
Judge Stephens’ Death.
It was with the profoundest grief and
pain that we announced last evening the
death of Hon. Linton Stephens, which
occurred at his residence in Sparta, at 5
o’clock p. m. on Sunday, the 14th. We
have obtained some additional particu
lars, which are reliable, which we now
state for public information.
*His disease was congestion of the
bowels and lungs—the result of causes
which wo now proceed to narrate.
After the exhaustive labors which he
,T rant through in the' Superior Court in
this city, three weeks ago, he went home
to attend an adjourned term of the
court in his own county, which came off
week before last. Haring this court his
labors were so great—so exhausting—ag
gravated as they were*>y the excessiVe
heat, that his strength failed, rendering
it necessary to continue several of his
important cases in consequence of his in
ability to proceed with them.
It was not, however, until Friday, the
5th inst, that he was confined to his bed;
and nothing serious was apprehended
until last Satnrday, when his disease as
sumed a dangerous type, terminating as
wo have stated.
HJudge Stephens was the youngest
^brother of Hon. Alex. H. Stephens, and
was we before stated, was 49 years old
on the first day of this month.
Many thousands of hearts will feel the
same pangs of sorrow which we do on
learning of the doath of this truly great
and noble man. In him has passed
away, in the prime of life, and in the
zenith of a well-earned feme, one of the
brightest intellects, one of the profound
est lawyers, jurists and statesman, as well
as one of the most powerful and brilliant
orators which Georgia ever produced.
But the brightest trait in his character,
and one that will bo longest remember
ed, was his unswerving honor and inflex
ible integrity in private and pnblio life.
His action in all things was governed by
principle. *
We have known Judge Stephens very
intimately since 1855. Wo have seen
him on many trying occasions; and in
mingling our tears with those most dear
to him, we can truly say that a truer an
bier or nobler man wo have never asso
ciated with.
This offering of onr heart is but a poor
tribute to liis memory. His proper eu
logy we leave to others. To the heart'
stricken brother, widowed wife, and or
phaned children, we extend all the condo
lence, that one beloved friend can extend
to others in those heavy afflictions which
alTect- all alike, though not in the same
degree. The ties of nature are tenderer
and stronger than any attachments
springing from the most devoted friend
ship or the highest admiration. .
^ H XTffTVT MBBMHi
Gen* Toombs’ Card,
This paper of Gen. Toombs did not
reach us till yesterday morning. It has
lingered on the way somewhere.
i Selma, Ala., July 15.—This city, to
day, by a large majority, voted one hand
red thousand dollars subscription to the
2*ew Orleans & Selma Railread.
The Fulton County Delegation t* the
Gubernatorial Convention.
The gentlemen selected by the Democ
racy of Fulton county, on Saturday last,
to represent them in the State Conven
tion of the 24th inst., is a most respecta
ble and influential delegation, who are
thoroughly identified with the interests
of Atlanta and Fulton county, and will,
in this respect, be true representatives of
odr people.
In choosing them, the Democracy of
Fulton gave a decided expression in favor
of Governor Smith, as their choice for
that high office at the ensning election.
The giving of expression to this choice
was, we know, on one acconnt, very un
pleasant and even painful to most of
those who did so; and it was only a sense
of duty to this city and to the State,
which prompted this action. No man in
this city is more highly esteebned and'
admired by almost our entire people,
than John H. James. , He'has as few
enemies, and as many friends in Atlanta
as any man has at his home any
where. We are well assured that a
very large majority of .those who
voted the Smith ticket on Saturday,
were warm personal friends of Mr. James,
who voted against him with no pleasure
whatever, and did so only from a sincere
conviction that it would be a very great
injury to Atlanta for the voice of this
oounty to be expressed against Governor
Smith; that it would be a very great
damage to the State for Governor Smith
not to be re-elected to the high office be
now.fills; and that it would be an incal
culable damage, not only to the State,
bat to Mr. James himself, to make him
onr Governor at this time, and under
existing cironmstances.
"We also are well aware that a very
large majority of those who voted for
the James ticket on Saturday, honestly
prefer Gov. Smith to fill the Executive
Chair for the next term, hut voted
as they did only because of their warm
personal friendship for Mr. James. *
The truth is, Mr. James is popular in
this county. He is highly esteemed by
almost everybody.- A more popular man
does not reside in Fulton county; and it
was a cross to our people to vote against
him.
But his great popularity and: the high
respect whioh our people entertain for
him, were not sufficient to indnee the
Democracy of Fulton county to signify
that he is their preference for Governor;
and they have in this case, as in the past,
firmly adhered to principle, and carried
out their honest political convictions; and
no consideration has been able to swerve-
them from the path of political duty.
The people of this county know that op
position to Gov. Smith is, to a great ex
tent, equivalent to a condemnation of
his course against public thieves and
plunderers. They know that however
far Mr. James may be from favoring any
of the schemes or plans of those who
have been guilty of the plunderings of
the past, who are now in possession of
their ill-gotten gains and desire to be let
alone with the same; or those who may
have plans of robbery or corruption for
the future which they wish to cany out—
no matter how much he may be opposed
to everything of this kind; nevertheless,
all those who are in this way interested,
have been thus far supporting Mr.
James, and will continue to support him
in the future, if he should be a candi
date—not so much because they expect
him to favor their wicked schemes, or to
protect them in past crimes, as their in
stinctive favoring of anything or any
body who is against Gov. Smith, They
will most earnestly snpport Mr. James,
or any one else, in opposition to the man
whom they know will give them no quar
ter whatever.
Atlanta occupies a peculiar position.
Our interest and the true interest of the
State, and the indorsement of Governor
Smith, all run together; and opposition
to him, whether so intended or not, is,
in effect, opposition to the highest in
terests of Atlanta, as well as the highest
interest of the State.
The P eople—the masses of Georgia—
have started out on a line of opposition
to the robberies of the past. If they intend
now to cease that opposition, the most
effectual way to do so is to oppose Gov.
Smith.
Gen. Toombs, Judge Locbranc and ex-
Governor Brown.
Some time ago, an extract from a pri
vate letter, written by General Robert
Toombs to a gentleman in Griffin, xvas
published in the Griffin Daily News. In
it Gen. Toombs alluded tc Judge Loch-
rane and ex-Governor Brown, by name,
in connection with the Mitchell proper
ty, and alleged that the transaction was
the result of bribery.
In reply to this, Judge Lochrane and
Gov. Brown published Cards in the Con
stitution; and to these Gen. Toombs re
plies in a Card, which we publish to-day.
We have, heretofore, not published
any of these Cards, but to-day we lay the
while before the readers of The Sun, so
that they may see the entire correspond
ence, and be able to form their own con
clusions.
From the Griffin Daily News; 27th June.
We have been permitted to make the
following extract from a private letter to
a gentleman of this city from General
Toombs: . i .
‘ Washington, June 19th, 1872.
Dear Sir—-I do not know the heirs of
Mitchell, and do not know whether they
are men, women or children, and cer
tainly made no allusion whatever to them
in the speech referred to, and I will add
that I have no donbt that if they had
any rights to the property referred to,
they were stripped of the largest portion
of their rights, as well as the State.
The Journals of the Legislature show,
that in the face of a direct 'offer of one
hundred thousand dollars for a quit
claim deed to the property in dispute,
made by General Austell and others,and
of the unanimous opinion of all the law
yers employed in the case by Bollock,
except one, that the title of the State
was clear, the Legislature accepted the
offer of thirty-five thousand dollars from
Lochrane, Kimball and Brown, who en
gineered the bill through the Legislature
in the name of the Mitchell heirs.
The term '/orphans of Mitchell” was
applied to them in derision of the pre
tenses, under which the people were
stripped of this property for the use of
these ’‘orphans.”
This action of the Legislature .was the
result of bribery, pure and simple. The
acceptance of the thirty thousand dol
lars in lieu of the hundred thousand of
fered under the circumstances contained
in the Journals is conclusive proof of
that fact.
I did state further, that as far as my
knowledge extended, all of the public
plunderers who pretended to be Demo
crats, from Tammany Hall down to the
smallest petty larceny thief on the State
Road, were Greeley men, and so is the
fact.
The spoliators of every party in this
country dread nothing so mnen as the
return to power of the State Rights
Democratic party of the United States.
That party is the term of all the enemies
of tho public by whatever name they
may be called.
I am very respectfully,
Tour ob’fc sv’t.,
t > , R« Toombs.
From the Constitution, 3d July.]
REPLY OF JUDGE LOCHRANE TO LETTER OF
MR TOOMBS PUBLISHED IN THE GRIFFIN
NEWS. l «» •!>
Editors Constitution : While the press
of the whole country almost is pro
nouncing Robert Toombs a madman,
his condition might, perhaps, inspire
pity rather than reply ; but to
those who are not acquainted with the
blaster and wind of this gentle
man, it may be proper to reply briefly to
the humbng and fury of his tirade about
the Mitchell properly, in which he ex
hibits his usual perverse propensity, to
deal in accusations, under the.pretexb of
zeal in the public welfare, and solicitude
for the interests of the State. The
speech which gave rise to the explanation
published in the Griffin News, was an
exhaustive harangue of billingsgate
against Mr. • Greeley. Toombs, forgetful
of his own blunders which plunged the
country in blood and stripped Georgia
of everything, his statesmanship under
took to protect and preserve, might be
expected to indulge in tolerance of opin
ion,_ but remembering only his own
vanity} and mad because he no longer
roles Georgia—all who differ with him
are branded with charges, clothed in
vituperation and disgusting epithets.
The people have long since given the
dignity of silence to his utterances re
garding them_ as the contortions of a
diseased imagination. But silence be
comes too generous when ravings assume
the attitude of vindictive and untruthful
aspersion.
In the letter alluded to, Toombs makes
reference to myself with others as hav
ing bought out the Mitchell heirs and
engineered the case through the Legis
lature. This charge is false. I got but
comparatively a small fee, and what I
hold as purchaser of the Mitchell prop
erty cost me paid, and in notes secured by
Mortgage to be paid,over §20,000 and the
improvements placed upon it, amounts
to over §64,000, making a cash transac
tion of some §84,000.
It must be a distorted and depraved
nature that can extract from so large an
outlay in permanent improvement on
the soil of Georgia the idea of injury
and detriment to the State, and must be
attributed to that malignity which small
minds have, originated in envy against
those whose success they feel as a wound.
Now, in the light of an argument, the
General says: The Journal of the House
shows Austell and others offered §100,-
000 for a quit claim to the property, and
the deduction drawn is, it must have
been fraud to sell it for the $35,000 paid
by the parties. This argument admits
the right to sell—that mnch is conceded
—but what were the facts ? The same
Journal discloses that the property
was in suit. Mr. Mitchell in his life gate
the -use of five acres for the purpose of erect
ing thereon the necessary buildings at the
terminus of ihe Western iC Atlantic Rail
road. The abandonment offpart was, in
law, the abandonment of the whole, and
the Stato had abandoned a part by ex
changing all on Alabama street with the
Macon Sc "Western Railroad for land on
which to. put these buildings. This part
was again exchanged by the Macon &
IV estern Railroad with the city of At-
lanta for the land on which the buildings
of the Macon & Western Railroad are
located, and this part was owned by com
promise with the city by the heirs of Mr.
MucheiL The new depot stands, a por-
non of it, on tnis very ground belonging
to the Mitchell s, and to which the State
had not the shadow of a title. The jour
nals would have shown that a proposi-
faon was made to give a deed to all the
State wanted for railroad purposes,
ana to t.tis property needed for
$35,000. The proposition of Austell, J
which was conceived in unfairness, was
to defeat the settlement, but, if accept
ed, the State thereby abandoned the
other side and lost all. For by the act
of 1837, the road could only be extended
to .a point not exceeding §even miles
this side of. the Chattahoochee river.
The seven miles terminated in the cut on
Broad street, and the land deeded by
Mitchell, if abandoned for the use for
which it was given, which it would clear
ly, first, by the exchange seven and one-
half years ago to the Macon and West
ern Railroad; second, by such contem
plated sale to Austell, would have result
ed :n the State losing all. Then, again,
by the loss the State had paid no consid
eration for the land on which the build
ings of the Western and Atlantic Rail
road aTe located, worth more than the
offer, and whsen was quieted and per
fected by the deed made by the heirs of
Mitchell to the State.
But again, it was in point of value
worth more, outside quieting the State’s
title, and giving title to some land she
had no pretence of title to. For the land,
if sold to Austell and his confreres could
not have been bfiilt upon or nsed for
any other purpose, and the taxes on the
James’ Block ami on the hlock in front
,of the Kimball House would not only
pay in a feW y6ars a larger amount, but
for all time bo ivsource of large and im
portant revenue; Thus what Toombs
thinks is proof of corruption is proof
that the Legislature acted wisely and
judiciously iu rejecting as it did the
quasi bid of the distinguished financial
speculators.
But this is not all like Sheridan look
ing over “the towering forests of enor
mity.” Toombs did not see that , the
journals showed a joint committee of a
previous.Legisla ture, with men as good as
ever sat in the House or Senate, and as
honest, reported in fawor of restoring the
property without a dollar, and was beat
en by only one vote in the Senate, advo
cated by men as true as any men living
or dead, upon the ground that legally it
belonged to the Mitchells and not to the
State. At the next Legislature, when it
passed, it was submitted to the General
Assembly by. the Governor, upon a pro
position which was liberal, and more
than the State had a right to ask. It was
submitted to a joint committee, was by
them beard upon agreement for the State,
and by myself against, was reported on
.favorably, was passed, deeds were ex
changed, sale took place, and the pur
chasers stand to-day with title as perfect
and unassailable as any in Georgia:
1. - Upon the original title which revert
ed to the Mitchell heirs.
2. Upon compromise of snits pending,
and of land conveyed and money paid.
3. Upon the conveyance of the State
under the Great Seal of the State by au
thority of the Legislature.
Now, for what purpose are such as
saults made?,. Why such vaporing accu-
•sations? Why was eternal denunciation
of everybody and everything that differ
with Toombs? Why, except in the men
tal obliquity that affects the tongue and
leads the brain through a [wilderness of
iniquities, to contemplate, like Cervante’s
knight, some magnificence of guilt bom
of its own creation. Too long have the
interests of Georgia been cursed by the
bewildering folly of Toombs. May the
god of justice interpose to save the State
from the farther infliction of his pesti
lential influence, and as the State has
heretofore been spared his precedent,
may Providence in the future, spare her
the curse of his parallel.
O. A. Lochrane.
From the Constitution, 3d July.
THE MITCHELL HEIR M ATTER.
Card of Ex-Gov. J. E. Brown.
Atlanta, Ga., July 2, 1872.
Editors Constitution: My attention has
been called to a letter published in the
Griffin Daily News, signed R. Toombs,
in reference to the passage of the resolu
tion of the Legislature of 1870, compro
mising the litigation between the heirs
of Samuel Mitchell and the State of
Georgia, in which Gen. Toombs uses the
following language: '
“The Legislature accepted the offer of
thirty-five thousand dollars from' Loch-
rone, Kimball and Brown, who engi
neered the bill through the Legislature
in the name of the Mitchell heirs. The
teim “Orphans of Mitchell” was applied
to them in derision of the pretenses un
der which the people were stripped of
this propel ty, for the use of these “or
phans.” This action of the Legislature
was the result of bribery, pure and sim
ple. * * * I did state further, that
fts far as my kdowledge extended, all of
the public plunderers who pretended to
be Democrats, from Tammany Hall down
so the smallest petty larceny thief on the
State Road were Greeley men, and so is
the fact.”
Now, if Gen. Toombs intends by thin
language to say that I have been guilty
of bribery in “engineering” this bill
through the Legislature, I pronounce his
statement an infamous falsehood and its
author an unscrupulous liar.
Very respectfully,
Joseph E. Brown.
GEN. TOOMBS’ CARD.
Washington, Ga., July 11, 1872.
To ihe Editorsff the Sun:—A brace of
ex-Chief-Jastices, of this State, honored
me with their notice and vituperation in
the Constitution of the 3d instant There
were a trio of these chevaliers cCinduslrie
engaged in the transactions referred to.
The third member of the firm (Mr. H. L
Kimball) is absent from the State, I sup
pose, “from' circumstances beyond bis
control.” These assaults excite no sur
prise.
Since the adjonrnment of that band of
public plunderers whom General Terry
and Bnllock installed as the Legislature
of Georgia inOctober, 1870, I have de
voted much of my time and strength in
endeavoring to secure the persons of
these accomplices in guilt, and to pre
serve the evidence of their crimes from
destruction, until the criminal laws could
ihe new depo', as well as to pay 1 be enforced against them, and a “free the Governor.
parliament ofjthe people” could assemble
to aid the administration of justice, and
wrest from the grasp of the spoilers so
much of their ill-gotten gains as might
be within the reach of law or legislation.
These efforts have not been wholly un
availing and I trust I have been able to
render some small service to some of the
very able and efficient committees whom
the Legislature have charged with the
consummation of this great work. My
small portion of the work has excited
the deepest enmity of the whole gang of
spoliators against me. I accept it as some
evidence that I have not labored wholly
in vain.
It is worthy of notice in the begin
ning, that not a single statement made
by me in the publication to which they
refer, is denied by either Lochrane or
Brown. They do not deny that they, in
connection with Kimball, engineered
through the Legislature, the Resolution
ceding the Railroad Park property in At
lanta, in the name of the heirs of Mitch
ell; nor that the Legislature accepted
thirty-five thousand dollars from their
clients in the face of a responsible offer
of one hundred thousand dollars ■ for a
quit claim deed to the same property;
nor that this action of the Legislature
was the result of bribery, pnre and sim
ple; nor that the acceptance of the thir
ty-five thousand dollars in lieu of the
one hundred thousand dollars offered
under the circumstances contained in
the journals, is conclusive of that fact.
Here are the specific charges contained
in my letter, and the proof referred to,
to sustain them.
I shall dismiss the reply of Lochrane
very summarily. Treachery, mendacity,
venality, servility to Bullock and the
Radical gang, rottenness in and out of
office since toe surrender, has so strongly
stamped his character, that nothing he
could now , say—no new falsehood he
might utter, and no new crime he might
now commit, would, in the least degree,
affect his public reputation or his private
character where he is known.
He boasts of baying a large portion of
the Park property, and of large amounts
expended, in its improvement, when I
know that since that purchase, if pur
chase it be, he has been compromising his
honest debts for about thirty cents in the
dollar; and if the money for the improve
ments came out of his purse, it mast
have been facquired by his practices
under color of his profession, or his mal
practices on the Bench.
Ex-Chief Justice Brown denies neither
of the statements which I affirmed. He
contents himself with quoting from my
letter, and then adding: “Nowif General
Toombs, by this language, intends to
say that I have been guilty of bribery in
engineering this bill through the Legis
lature, I pronounce his statement an. in
famous falsehood and its author an*un-
scrupulous liar.”
He quoted the language, and there
fore knew I did not “say” so.. If he felt
in doubt about the intention—the con
struetion of the language—he might
have asked for an explanation. The
propriety of this course is so obvious
that ho gentleman could fail to perceive
it. Brown preferred hypothetical de
nunciation, the usual dodge of a vulgar
poltroon, and played his characteristic
role. He is extremely technical: "if
General Toombs intends by this language
that / have been guilty of bribery in en
gineering this bill through the Legisla
ture,” &c. I think the probabilities are
very much against Brown’s being per
sonally engaged in the bribery. I think
he is too canning and skillful a lobbyist
to run any such unnecessary risks, es
pecially with such experts as Kimball
and Lochrane, aided by Blodgett, assist
ing him in the work of engineering the
bill through the Legislature.
The plain history of the case, and the
examination of the jonmals of the Leg
islature (thei evidence to which I referred)
will fully vindicate the correctness of my
opinion of the transaction.
' In 1842, Gharles Mitchell, with the
view to secure the location of the depot,
of the road on his land, donated, in fee
simple, by deed of warranty, five acres
of land to toe State for “placing there
on the necessary buildings which may
hereafter be required for public purposes
at the terminus of said road.” The State
entered, occupied and held undisturbed
possession of this property for nearly a
quarter of a century.
In 1867, Brown & Pope brought suit
for the heirs of Mitchell for the Park
portion of toe property. No action was
ever had oh this suit; but in 1868, the
case was carried before the Legislature,
and the claim rejected. It there slept
until Bnllock got another reconstruction
act through Congress, and he and Gen.
Terry bad, by fraud and force, ejected a
large number of the true representatives
of the people, and replaced them with a
sufficient number of bis own pliant and
corrupt tools to render powerless the hon
est men whom he could get no pretext
for ejecting.
The State being thus prostrate at the
feet of the usurpers and plunderers,{Bol
lock, their chief, with a corrupt Judicia
ry of his own appointment, with a venal
Legislature, sounded his bugle, and
called his clans to the sacking of the
Commonwealth.
Lochrane was among the very first to
obey the call. In July, 1870, he put in
the rejected claim of toe heirs of Mitch
ell, in a proposition to Bnllock, to give
him the whole of the property in dispute
in the snits, except a strip of land two
hundred and forty feet wide, between
Loyd and Pryor streets, where^he Depot
then and now stands, for thirty-live
thousand dollars. This property was
estimated then to be worth between
three hundred thousand and four hund
red thousand dollars, by some of the best
citizens in Atlanta. The proposition was
referred by Bullock to the counsel he
had employed to defend the State’s
interests. Mr. ‘William Dougherty,
Judge Collier, Mr. Hoyt. Judge Hop
kins and Mr. Nunnally, of the counsel,
met, consulted, and, except Nunnally,
unanimously decided that the title of the
State was clear and unquestionable, and di
rected one of their number so to report to
Judge Hopkins differs with Messrs.
Dougherty, Collier and Hoyt as to the
other facts,- bat agrees that the title of
the State was clear.
Bullock sent in Lochrane’s proposition,
with a false statement, os was his habit,
of a material fact in the case. This mes
sage was received on the 13th of Octo
ber, 1870, referred to a select committee
of both houses the same day, and on the
next day, was reported book with a re
commendation that Lochrane’s proposi
tion be accepted. The counsel, for the
State had no notice of the meeting of
the committee and were not present, ex
cept Nunnally, who favored Lochrane’s
proposition, and Judge Hopkins, who
suggested to Bnllock a compromise, “on
such terms as the relative vantage
ground of the two parties will justify.”
Lochrane represented the Mitehell h^rs.
This report was made the special order of
the day for the 17th October. It was taken
up on that day. Mr. Candler, on the
14th, having moved to i eqnest the Gov
ernor to send in tan opinions of the
counsel for tie Scute, bis resolution, on
motion of Mr. Speer, was laid on the
table.
On the 17th Mr. Candler moved a sub
stitute reciting the offer of General Aus
tell and others, to bill one hundred thou
sand dollars for a quit claim title to toe
Park, and providing for its acceptance
and patting the property up at auction,
with that upset bid.
Mr. Bradley offered as a substitute to
the whole a resolution to give the heir3
of Mitchell the right to sue iu tho courts
of the State for the property, which sub
stitute was rejected, and the substitute
of Mr. Candler was also rejected by one
vote, and the report was then adopted by
22 to 11 votes.
The Chairman of the Hon>o Commit
tee, on the Utii Oet«»i>er, made the same
joint report to the Horn**, It was taken
up on the 20th, nud Mr. Hull moved the
adoption of the Semite’s report as a sub-
sitnte for his own.
Mr. Scott then submitted the offer of
Gen. Austell and twelve other citizens of
Atlanta, to pay one hundred thousand
dollars for the State’s quit claim deed to
the property within ninety days af
ter date; and offered a resolution pro
viding for commissioners to pat np the
property at pnblio auotion; and pro
viding farther, that if the commissioners
failed to get a bid of one hundred thou
sand dollars for a quit-claim title to the
property, the Governor should be au
thorized to accept the proposition of the
Mitchell heirs for thirty-five thousand,
dollars. This proposition was rejeoted
by a vote of 49 to 73, and the Senate’s
substitute was adopted.
Such is the record upon whioh I form
ed the opinion that the action was toe
result of bribery, pure and simple, I
did not suppose that even all who voted
for the bill were corrupted. Some men
were, doubtless, misled. Others, influ
enced by other than corrupt motives;
but it is clear that the managers of the
scheme of plunder profited by their be-
rayal of their public trust.
The record is complete. The State’s
title was settled by the judgment of the
Supreme Court; was clear and indubita
ble, in the opinion of four of the leading
counsel of toe State.
Their opinions were suppressed by a
direct vote of the Senate. The friends
of the bill refused to permit the claims
to go before toe courts for trial, though
counsel fees to the amount of fifteen
thousand dollars were paid to defend the
titles. Thirty-live thousand dollars was
accepted from the Mitchell heirs for a
property in lieu of one hundred thousand
dollars offered by others,- without the
pretense of a reason therefor being found
on the record—except Jackson’s letter to
Bullock—which property, within a few
days after the consummation of this
wickedness, with all the cloud of this
corruption hanging over it, brought at -
public outcry over two hundred thous
and dollars.
Gov. Brown does not deny that he
aided in lobbying this measure through
the Legislature. He was present in the
Senate when the bill was before it, as
was also Lochrane, Kimball and Blod
gett; andhewas justiyrebuked on the floor
of the Senate by Mr. Candler for his con
duct in this matter.
Lobbying is a crime—a misdemeanor
at common law; a crime intensified by
his high judicial position.
Bnt there is yet a still graver charge
than lobbying against the ex-Chief
Justice. Before these scenes occur
red, the case of Thornton and
others vs. Trammell and others,
came before the Supreme Court. It was
a case really against the Western & At
lantic Railroad, for the Dalton depot,
and involving the same principles. The
counsel for the road objected to Brown’s
sitting in that case, on the ground that
he was employed in the Mitchell heirs
caBe, which was undecided. See 39th
Georgia, 1208. Brown stated “that in that
case, the language of the deed is differ
ent, and I have turned over the case with
the obligation of the fee to the other
counsel. Under these circumstances,” he
was adjudged by the other Judges, com
petent to sit on the case.
He did sit, dissented from the court, but
gave no opinion. He weakened the opin
ion all he conld by his dissent, but gave
no opinion himself.
Was that statement of Brown true?—
If so, he either had no claims on the
Mitchell heirs for fees, or he afterwards
contracted for and accepted fees while on
the Bench. If not true, he sat in a case
in the decision of which he was interest
ed, and decided in his own favor.
It is a high crime in the highest judi
cial officer of the State to bring his influ
ence to bear in any way to control the
action of the Legislature. Tfia very po
sition may control those who have snits
before him. The ordinary criminal may
be in his hands. He may have power
to_ save from just punishment for his
crimes even the victim of his own per
fidious debauchery. R. Toombs.
Unanimously and Unceasingly for Gov
ernor Smith*
Editors Sun : At a meeting of the De
mocracy to send delegates to ihe State Con
vention, held in Alberts, to-day, the fol
lowing resolution, offered by A. L.
Mitchell, Esq., was unanimously adopt
ed :
“Resoled, by the Democratic, Party of
Clark county in Convention assembled,
That the delegation from this county to
the Gubernatorial Convention to be held
in Atlanta on the 24th instant, be in
structed to vote unanimously and unceas
ingly for the nomination of the Hon.
James M. Smith, for Governor.
This county will give an almost unani
mous vote for Governor Smith.
Sen in.