Newspaper Page Text
ERROR CEASES TO BE DANGEROUS WHEN REASON IS LEFT FREE TO COMBAT IT.”—Jefferson.
VOLUME XXL
ATLANTA, GA., WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 1.18(J9.
NUMBER 35.
Labur la Labor.
Engagement* with our l’team tnemis who
were iu the city on yesterday, iu attendance
upun tlie Stale Press Convention, have so inter-
lered with out editorial duties, that we have had
no tune to |W|»rr any original matter lor this
ixttue ol the INTELLIGENCER, and as the “Labor
MovetueuT" in the 'North has extended South,
even to Atlanta, we lay la-tore our readers the
following article Irotu the New York World,
• on.meudiug it to those who lake interval iu the
iiu|Kmaul question:
“ \\ ilh the I lent and most eaiuesl wishes for
the ruccra of everything that may subserve
the real intere-tjol the working men and wo
incu iu this country, we tear that very little
good wilt come liom the Laboi IViUVeutloU now
in ecs.nim iu Philadelphia. For more than
tweniy years these crude conventions iu this
country have l*ceu endeavoring to ettect a solu
tion oj vexing labor questions, hut as yet very
hide has been accomplished, and tor obvious
reasons. We gave, Wednesday, some idea ol
the enormousstrength the English trades-unions
have attained, the latest ceusus statistics show
ing that these associations embraced not less
that nine bundled thousand ol the very cream
<>1 the working classes in that country. Nor
are mi te numbers to be taken as an estimate ol
the really prodigious power which these organi
sations wield, because two hundred picked men
acting in unison might, and do, lay down the
laws which govern all the rest ol the trade, in
cluding even the non unionists.”
“The strength ol the British association lies
not in uumlieis, but simply in the tact that they’
are sternly practical. The trades resolutely re
fuse to meddle with fiohtics, and decline to be
drawn into any side issues which do not sheet
thetr organizations. Their action is direct; all
they i are tor is the establishment ol their organ
izations upon substantial bares, and such inci
dental benefits as are to be derived Irotu the ac
cumulation and projier use ol funds devoted to
Hie rebel ol the hick and disabled or the carry
ing on ol strikes. All else is beyond the imme
diate purposes ol these bodies. Then, too, the
trades unions w hich at hist were local have
now become national, and ere strictly classed,
the separate interests by tln-UL-elves, so that the
amalgamated engineers, the ' amalgamated car -
loniiumcmii 1
S'olowel r. tliilbrrl.
I have just ehaueed up.ni a recent number ot
the Chimney Corner, eouiainiug a puritan ol the
able Superintendent ol the Stale lb'ad, ubuh.
though tar lr.nil bciug what his tiw-udamightde-
sire, is readily revogui. ■ d
But it is not ol this 1 would speak, but ol the
importer l sketch which accompanies it This,-
although, perhaps, not particularly cxieptioua
hie, seems to la- ii..l to ,to lull jlbtkv to its »ub
jecl.
it hi happen.--! lletl pioli-ssionul Ini-in. ue-
rOHitsleil mt pii-em t- in Atlanta during the
excited itisciis-iiou ot tin Milelieil claim, and the
Hmue railway purchase in countctiou with the
prosfteelive e\tension ol the line to Decatur,
Ala, and thus iuy attention wa-; diawn to Col.
iiulhcrl, whose iiniotmtable will aud ilcter-
luineit |s is ti lam •- well-then most cuuuiugly
CXI-IUpiUii-d
During n. temporary atoence iu New Y'ork
preparing the excursion certificates connected
with his increasingly popular immigration move
ment, which promises so well lor the South, a
formidable influence had been lobbying the
Legislature to procure the retrocession ol valu
able property to the heirs ol a Mr. Mitchell,
who, in the early days of Atlanta, had donated
the same to the Western A Atlantic Railway
Colonel Hulhert arrived late in the atternoou ol
the day preceding that on which the vote was
taken, which it was conceded would result, ad
versely to the Slate. Succeeding iu arresting
decisive action by asking time to prepare and
communicate important information- -which
was laid on the desks of members the next
morning in printed lorm— he w r ent to work in
earnest; worked 'hard day and night; proved
an overmatch lor the lobbyists; uud saved the
State not less than halt a million ol dollars!
and made again good the soubriquet of “ Shurp
and Quick" so houorahly and deservedly won
by the unusual promptness and energy which
characterises all his business movements.
These same commanding qualities subse
quently achieved lor him a yet more enduring
ami widely beneficial victory, stamping him no
less a statesman and diplomatist, than as a man
of superior practical views and qualifies! iousi
He advocated the purchase ol the Rome Rail-
I'KITBK STiUa I'OITKT Room. (
Atusu, Ui., Am-u-t S4, 1SM». )
tSE HON. JOHN HUSK INK, U. 8. DISTRICT
JUDGE FOR THE STATE OF GEORGIA.
In the Mutter of Meador if Brothers, Tobacco
1 h-.de r*.
J Mill
U. S Attorney .ami L. K. Bleckley, counsel
l.-r tbe Uorerum.-ut, cued, J W. Blacksluue Kept.
ft'-V 4 Hai i roll's Hist, 0. S 414, 14 Stats lOi, Acts
SII I'oofifss. 3 sessim.. p 117. Conk. 740 Act of
J ly 2 1, ISOB Act Ol bl 4 Staid 07. Act of lSWi-14
seel. ': Am. L;.« Ke\ lr%f Ml.
». A. ts.. brine and h. J. (iarlrell for Veador &
Brothers, cited, :: BUtch. 14s S Tsuntnu 260. Ad id
March 2. is.'H. Bright. Fed Diet, lis; 2s Eu C. L R.
3 N. vtt e and M in., 725. 2 Dallas *S 1 Or. O. 0.581
.— 1 clsioie sS note writs of a-sistance, bright Die.
I'd Ji.U Rev Ac:a ls.te-67. i!sri. L. K 417 Laws ol
t . S. Courts 47 Code o Ga 9S5. Burd on Habeas
Corpus Law R ports Ex. cases 290, voL 11. 1 Peters
C C. K 291. Bright Dig. 94, lUi, 163.
pcnteis, ami other l ombinatiwna work each in I w *y> uud its extension to the Alabama line,
their own direction; aud there has been no at
tempt in England, as there is here, to assemble
all the diticriug trades in one general congress
or convention. It anything approaching such
action has occurred at all, it lias been the mere
inlormal gathering ol a lew U-ndiug delegates
Irotu diticrent unions to settle trade disputes or
to look alter the general interests which all
trades unions have in common, but never to
agitate |N>)ilical Idol ms. When our trades-
uiiioua leaiu to lolluw the English example iu
these respects, they may expect to attain some
thing Approaching the English success.
“ It must he conlcsse.l that there is something
exceedingly lasciuating in the lormatiou ol a
great IhIhjz party w hich, by the mere force of
numbers, shall la- able to ell eel at the polls
some ot the reforms which are sought. But
the establishment of such a party in the United
States, or in auV other free country, t»simply
impossible. General potuice, as embraced in
the carrying on ot the government, the selec
tion ot proper persons to administer the same,
the finances, aud other purely political ques
tions, must be lull to the regularly organized
parties, ol which there aie two aud two only, iu
ttiia Country. A labor party or labor congresses
w ill uever be called upou, as such distinctive
organizations, to attend to these things.”
“ But, as we feared, it has been the mistake
ol the convention now sitting, as it has been
the bane ot all similar conventions iu this
country,to meddle with matters which iu no
wise directly concerned it, or even the immedi
ate interests ot the working classes. The moun
tain in labor, which, alter much groaning aud
tribulation, brought lortli a mouse, is paralleled
by labor iu labor at l'biladclpliia exhausting
three whole days, to say nothing ot the patience
ot the delegates, iu the effort to eject Miss
Anthony.”
"There is no hope tor these labor conventions
till they agree upou the lollowiug points
1. That there shall be no discussion or action ot
purely polities! character, such as looking to the
loruiauou ol a new labor party, or to the siding
with either ot the now established parties as a
distinctive labor branch ol the same. 2. That
t be discussions shall be confined solely to mat
ters immediately aliening the trades, to-wit: the
organization ot umous and then the putting ot
them on such bases that they can treat with
capital ou terms of equality. 3. That represen
tation in these convi mums must be confined to
workingmen only, and delegates must be ad
mitted from bona fide organizations alouc.
“All these vital principles have been disre
garded by the convention at Philadelphia,
which has been indeed swamped by resolutions
on all sorts of reformatory measures, including
wonn n’s rights, lands, banking, currency, land
reform, the tunctious ol government, 'and mauy
more matters the proper elucidation ot which
would compel centuries of discussion and de
cades ot experiment, even alter the best plans
had l«ccn decided upon. So long as these things
are (leruiitled to make up the greater part ot
tbe proceedings ol labor conventions, what is
really important w ill surely be lost sight ol; and
wc believe we speak the real sentiments ot tbe
great mass oi Workiugtnen aud women in this
country when we deplore the vague and discur
sive discussion ot a convention which proteaa-
cdly was called for work, not words."
The largest tree in the lower Park went by
the Liard tuts atternoou. it has shaded, in its
tune, probably, a hundred thousand jieople, and
braved, at least, a thousand storms. What lime
s|>ei<M I or years, even iu defiance ol the gashes,
aud cuts, and locks ot newsboys and school-
t.ois, the wood mail's axe levelled forever in a
btiel hour. “Wnndmim, spare that tret 1 ,” has
L o me a sung quite but ot place tu the city.—
Hi change.
Rev. Father McDonald, ot Key West, was
attacked with yellow lever while officiating at
the altar ou the lSUi ultimo, aud died iu sixty
U was a young man, aged twenty-six,
a ul liit-liuguisUcvl .for las pit ly and mental eu-
.... amenta. Ilia death Jett Key West tempora
lity w about a prusl, and the lu«-eiai services
were- held by a layman ami tbe sisters ol tbe
outtrul
where, it was understood, parties stood ready to
extend it to Decatur, Ala., on the Memphis A
Charleston Railway. The project encountered
bitter and strenuous opposition iu both branches
ot the Legislature; but the immense, (aud to
any other than Col. Hulhert, appalling,) in
fluence against it, ou the part ot gentlemen ot
signal ability aud deserved popularity aud
|Kiwer, was bravely tuet by the Superintendent
ot the Slate Hoad who was watching closely
all measures calculated to impair its value to
the Stale. As iu the Mitchell claim case. Col.
Hulliert worked day and night; aud through
his sleepless vigilatic*, unflagging spirit, and
untiling energy, proved invincible, and trium
phantly carried—though iu a modified form his
wise and sagacious measure.
Please lot liear until i mention aue otlu-r fea
ture of Col. iiulberts policy.
Per«-«t4vlnsr rm* immense advantage.) hkely to.
result to the road he so admirably manages, in
increasing business and profits ; to the immedi
ate section it traverses by stimulating the devel
opment of dormant resources, and thereby in
creasing wealth and values, and reducing the
per centum ot taxation ; to capital ami labor ;
by employing aud making both profitable ; aud
to the country at large, by adding to its com
mercial aggregate and indueoce, he has started
his brother Railway Managers in the South—
by reducing the heights on line tor agricultural
purposes, and on coal and iron neatly one halt,
whereby the production of tbe two tirsl-uauted
has been quadrupled, aud that ot the last named.
(Iron) will soon be stimulated beyond precedent
in the South. In twelve months, by continuing
his preseut lilieral and talighted policy, he will
have done more in this direction, than has la-eu
previously done by auy one man in a quarter ol
a century'.
Such a man deserves well ol his country and
neighbors, and will be sustained by all true tnen.
-I >A\VsoN.
The Water kauilue lu i*l»li jilt IpLln.
There is gieat appreheusiou exhiing in the
“City ot Brotherly Love" oi a Water famine
prevailing there. It seems that the beds of the
Schuylkill and the Delaware have nearly run
dry, and that the inhabitants ol the city are iu
danger ot sudenng iu consequence. Many ol
the large factories have ceased to work, and an
attempt to obtaiu water by opening the old
wells of the city has proved a lailure. During
the last thirty days one thousand five hundred
millions ot gallons ot water were’pumped from
the rivers tor use in the city, and yet the cry is
still “waterI water! what are we to do lor
water 1”
We refer to this cry for water in Philadelphia,
and the distress produced there fi»r the want of
it, in order to direct the attention of our city
readers to the tact that Atlanta will need and
must have greater supplies ol water than her
wells will be capable ot producing a? her popu
lation increases. It is time that serious consul
eration be given to this important subject. The
health ot the city, so proverbial and »o good
with, her present supply ot water,cannot he.
preserved without largely increased supplies
wheu her population doubles what it is now;
and that this will be the case in five or six yi ars
more, is apparent Irom the ratio ot increase an-
uually, according to the most reliable estimates,
tor the past lour years. Our city authorities
and citizens must wake no iu rcgird to this
matter. From the Chattahoochee the city must
draw its supplies—supplies tor domestic u-e, lor
mauutactunug, and other purpose. Onlay is
daugerou?. Water works Atlanta nitre t have,
anti the sooner “the hall is put in motion" to
have them, the better lor the continued pros
perity and health ot the city.
1 U4 c k'i»ktur’
<* l»tnit)u in in.- NfMor
The Hyruu Scandal.
Mrs. Harriett Beecher Stowe is being severely
dealt with by the press oi all parlies North and
South, aud very properly too, Ibr the publn a
tiou which she recently made ot the cause ot j
separation between Lotd and Lady Byron. It
is, iu truth, an outrageous publication, and had
! it lieeu made by' a man, it would have consigned
j him to merited latxtuy. The slmy is tlisgnstiug;
i shocking to eV. rv refined stnse; suhveisive ot
• I 1
abi.-fi
i„lL> • X.lusi .«» -4 . till! mallei
the important decisiou oi Judge Erskiue, ot me j
i. h i ;.uns oi the btsu vd Georgia, uiy 1 iivinc,
among other questions, the Cunsuiubouafitj of j a ‘-> MCr - ,n a
s. me ot the provisions of the Internal Revenue !
.v. is ,)i I;iH. in..; i;or \Y "trenot present j
a to it the opuii.si \* .s Ut-iiiiu nut it is spoken j
ol by UiembeiSvJ ti e Imt as L-mg very able.— :
f. r ours. T. iio.ugti *-uti riaiuiug a high re-
S4a-it L.l tilt ability ol .lu.tge El ski lie, we cau-
pot but pellviVe that It lUlii.alej Very platuly
the Juice's «V*'|t ktiOWU »l. visas a FialeOUld
and his • tuMafiziug pfudivitiea. . ■
v%’« ban that there are mauy other cases,
nioials amt decency. How any woman n
thoroughly debased and ni<<ib .l in fie. cuiH
.an ffn lei..re the pucii. ,.iii. s...t. ... • p sure. J
ndmiumg it to be true, which we Jo out, « a )
And who can be benefiiu-d by ■
Mrs. Stowe’s publication ? Not society; n<n j
Lady By ron’s memory: not the relatives ot that I
lady; nor can literature. It startles i-vtu the i
vicious, virtue shrieks at and abhors it. and it i
slanders the inemt-ry of a diceasevi lvi>, tfic j
sister ..t t er husband, who ou hi r vlyiu. ka ked, |
it re artirmed, to Lady Byron lor consolation au.l
help, was ever true in her sisterly adectiou tu \
her brother, and whose hie gives the lie to the j
cbm ge width Mrs. Stowe brings against her. No i
true-ht artetl woman—woman in her pure in- |
tuilar to ilnt .4 the Mtadura, out it was agr.ed | Ft met*—would publish to the world what Mrs j
counsel at me lK-gtuuiug oi ihe aigument in deliberately done,
v.-e ttiat this should be a test case, and
tills
Yutiacqucully' void red the Others.
Thet are having good rains about Macon
and the.CGUntry below,
Erskine, ,1 —The Supervisor of Internal
Revenue, lor the Stall's ot Florida and Georgia,
issued a summons against, each ol the members
ot the firm of Meador A Brothers, Dealers in
Tobacco, in Atlanta, Georgia, under a provision
contained in the 49th section ol the Act of Con
gress ol July 20, 18C3. requiting them to appear
betore him, at his office, at a certain time, aDd
to testily under oath, and to produeotbeir books,
papers, Ac , relating to any business transacted
fiy or through them, lroiu the 20th July, ISfW, to
1st July, lb09. The loregoing is only a synop
sis ul the contents of the summons. The par
ties were duly served but tailed to appear or to
produce their books, beir.re the supervisor. He
then made application to me iu pursuance of a
provision contained in the- 9th Section ot the
Act of July 13, lbOG—14 Slata. 102—tor an at
tachment against the Meadors. But, btlnre it
wa« issued they voluntarily appeared ; an at-
lai litueni nisi was granted and time given to
them to show cause why it should not be
made absolute. On the return day, they ap
peared and by their counsel, Gartrell aud Loch-
iaue, placed theii defence on file. It is in sub
stance, as follows :
First, That so much oi the act of July, 1868,
as grants authority to a supervisor to compel per
sons to testily and to pioduce their Links, Ac.,
in an imaginary case, is unconstitutional and
void.
Second, If constitutional, still the supervisor
can only pr.H'eed to conqiel the -production ot
books, Ac , iu the same manner and to the same
extent as aases-ora can do; and that neither
*' can compel persons to testily and produce their
bools, Ac , iu an imaginary case against parties
residing out of their districts.”
Third, That the 49th secliou of the act author
izing the supervisor to summon any person to
produce books, Ac., and to appear and testify
under oath, is of no ettect, “ because the provis
ions of the act of July, 1866, lor enforcing the
summons are inconsistent w ith the provisions ot
existing laws for the punishment ot contempts.”
Fourth, That no order of punishment can he
rendered in a case belore the judge, Inr disobey
ing a summons to appear belore a supervisor, as
the act “ directs that no older can he issued in
consistent with existing laws lor the punish-
uieul of contempts, aud by those laws, no court
or tribuua) can punish lor contempt, except as
against violations ol its own orders.”
Fifth, That the powers here claimed by the
supervisor “ ate judicial fvowers, and that the
judiciary is expressly lived by the constitution
aud previously exisliug laws—neither assessors
nor supervisors iormiug any part of it.”
During the argument, which was elaborate
and able, additional propositions were advanced
oially, and various objections were taken to the
constitutionality ol the 9th section of the act ot
1866, aud the 49th section of ihe act of 1868.
The 49th section ol the act of 1868—15 Stats.
125 - alter providing lor the appointment by the
.Secretary ol the Treasury, on the ivcomineuda
non ul the Commissioner ol Internal Revenue,
ot certain officers, to be called supervisors ol in
ternal revenue—proceeds to define their duties
aud powera as follows: “ It shall be the duty ol
every supervisor ot internal revenue, under the
direction ot the commissioner, to see that all
laws and regulations relating to the collection ot
iuterna! taxes are f&ithtully executed and com
plied with ; to aid in the prevention, detection,
aud punishment of any lratids in relation there
to, ami to examine ioto the efficiency and con
duct of all officers of internal revenue within
his district, and tor such purposes, he shall have
power to examine all persons. Links, papers, ac
counts, and premises, and to administer oaths,
and to summon any person to produce books
and papers, or to apjiear and testify under oath
belore bun, and to compel a compliance with
such summons in the same manner as assessors
may do," Ac.
The mode by which assessors may compel a
compliance, is pointed out iu the 9tn section ol
tbe act of. 1860; “ In case any person so sum
moned shall neglect or reluse to obey such sum
mons, or to give testimony, or to answer inter
rogatories as required, it shall lie lawful tor the
assessor to apply to the Judge of the District
Court, or to a Commissioner of the Circuit
Court of the United States lor the district within
which the person so summoned resides, tor an
attachment against such person as lor a con
tempt. Ii shall tie the duly of such Judge or
Coiumissinntr to hear such application, and if
satisfactory plot J be made, to issue an attach
ment, directed to some proper officer, lor the
arrest ot such person, aud upon his being brought
before him, to proceed to a hearing ot the case ;
and upon such hearing, the Judge or Commis
sioner shall have power to make such order as
he shall deem proper, not inconsistent with the
provisions ot existing laws, for the punishment
.it contempts, to enforce- obedience to the re
quirements of the summons, and punish such
person lor his deiault or disobedience.”
At the opening of ihe proceedings, Mr. Mil-
ledge, United States Attorney, stated that he
held a Liter of instructions from the Com mis
.-.inner ol Internal Revenue t<> the supervisor,
dated June 11th, 1869, and added that it was
desirable it should be read to satisty the Mead
ors, ttiat it was not idle curiosity, but duty,
tiial guided him in issuing the summons. It
was piixluced aud read.
The substance ol the letter wa3, that certain
officers ol the Internal Revenue Department had
L-eu in Georgia, examining with reteience to
the affairs of certain dealers iu t »bacco, snufl,
Ac., whose lactones iu V.rgiuia and North Car
oliua had been seized, and that the assessor at
Atlanta was instructed to procure iulorwation
trotn agents ol the tobacco houses in question,
which it was necessary to use in conneetiou
aiiU the cases in which the officers reterred to
were engaged. He is then instructed fir obtain
nom the cooks, Ac., ot these agents,—whose
names would he furnished to him by the said
as essor—the iutormation needed by the said
. -fficers, and forward it to them, at Richmond,
Virginia.
it was argued for the Meadors that the pro
vision in the act giviug power to the supervisor
to compel jiersous to testify under oath belore
him, and to produce their books, papers, Ac, tor
his inspection, in an imaginary case, is uncon
stitutional and void.
Admit the assumption—directly or hypo
thetically—does it iheretore loliow that the
law ie unconstitutional ? If this is an u im
aginary case”—a mere visionary fancy ema
nating from the brain ol the supervisor—it
oughi not to be countenanced ; tor a proceeding
ot this kind might prove little less burttul to
the mercantile interests ol the Meadors, thau
one tiegun and prosecuted to gratify sinister in
quisitiveness or mischievous espionage, and nut
- ’tut fde, and for the public good. Moreover, to
institute a proceeding or action, not to detenniue
a right or controversy, but to deceive the Court
and raise a prejudice against third persons, is a
contempt. Core v. Phillips, t’a. Temp. Hard.
237. S. O 3 Hawk. P. O. 329
Bnt :itlr r a careful perusal ot the statute and
me 1. Lei ot the cominissioi'.ei, iik n lettci us
in tiHUXi e t my mi..J re aolisbcxl mat tfire prc<-
cfejing is not in an imaginary case ; but mai,
on i Lc contrary, there was sufficient cause h.r
the issuing ol Uie summons by the saperviser,
and that his actioo in the premises was war
ranted hy the statute. It so, then this proceed
tag is Lgiiimateiy here. Under .urecii n f
tl.e commissioner, it is«he auty ol the super
visor to aid in the prevention, di tectum and
luinisbnteat of any trau-as in relere-n. e to tfi.-
collection of internal revenue. The commis
sioner informs him ( tut certain tobacco lactoiies
L » l Len seized in Virginia and North Cato iua ,
and directs him to procure the names ui the
agents ot those factories, and to ascertain front
their books, papers, Ac., information needed by
certain internal revenue employees or officers,
touching the factories seized. Upon these in
structions he seems to have acted.
But it must not be imagined from what has been
just said that either wriuen or verbal instructions
.ire necessary belore the supervisor can issqf &
summons under the 4Sth section o* actol 1.868.—
Oongress did not snioteud to limit his authority
and useluluess. True, he mast obey aud follow
the instructions ol the commissioner wheu given.
He must also act in good faith. Aud a public
officer is i>resuined io act in obedience- to his
duty, until the contrary appears.
The ruling on this point being adverse to the
Meadors, the proceedings, with the exception
ol, perhaps, some brief details, might end here;
so tar, at least, as the constitutionality o! the
prevision in the 49th secliou of the act of 1868,
lias been impugned. For, if this provision is
void, when there is no real case, tiie presump
lion is fair that it is constitutional and valid
when the case is not an imaginary' one.
Another point was presented and discussed,
namely: That, grauuusr the constitutionality ol
the provision, still, the supervisor can only pro
ceed to compel parties to appear, testify or pro
duce their books, Ac., iu the same manner, and
to the same exteut as assessors can do; and
that neither cau compel them to do any of these
acts, in an imaginary ea3e against persons re
siding out ot his (the vruwrvLorV) district.
The 49th secliou de.’ Lies that it shall be the
duty of the supervisor aid io the i *'eveution,
detection and punishment of any frauds iu re
lation to the collects'!: ol internal tax29, and to
examine into the efficiency and conduct of all
officers of internal revenue within his district.
For what purpo-e were the powers in ques
tion conferred upon Ihe supervisor? The Act
says to aid in the prevention, detection, and
punishment ol auy !r ,uds in relaliou to the col
lection of taxes. There are no wools in this
clause—nor can any be imported into it—re
stricting the operaiiou and 1 ihet of the super
visor’s action to the Vrritorial boundary of his
district. True, his action is within his di nomi
nated district; but the legal consequences ot the
action may afiect |a rsons or things elsewhere
The next clause con (era on the supervisor, pow
ers distinct and different from these, namely, to
examine into the efiiciency and conduct ot the
revenue officers within his district. And on this
IHiiut 1 coucur with the counsel lor the Meadors.
I likewise agree with them, that the supervisor
can compel llie production of hooks, etc., only io
the manner aud to the extent that an assessor
can, under the 9th section of the Act of 1866.
When either issues a summons, and Ihe party
served negh cts or relttses to appear, to testily un
der oath, or to produce his.books, etc., the pow
er ot each—the one as assessor, and tne other as
supervisor— is exhausted. For remedy,to com
pel compliance wilh the exigencies ol the sum
mons, he must make application in the manner
provided in fhe section last relerred to, to a
Judge or a commissioner.
Even on the hypothesis that this is an imag
iuary case it is yet due to counsel on both sides
that the clauses cited from the 49th sec*,
tion ot the Act of 1868, should receive aeon-*
slruction to the extent ot their argument. Coun
scl tor the Meadors insisted that the 49th sec
tion, empowering tbe supervisor to summon per
sons to appear, produce 1 looks, etc., and to testi
ly under oath, is of no effect, beo-ause the provis
ion iu the 9lIi sretiou ot the Act ol 1866 is in
consistent wilh the provisions ot existiug laws
lor the punishmeut ol contempts.
Congress deriving authority Irom the Consti
tution to ordain and establish courts of justice
subordinate to the Supreme Court, has hitherto
conferred upon these courts,such jurisdiction as
it has thought proper to bestow ; but there still
lie dormant iu the national legislature, vast and
various powers which only await the exigency,
essential to call them into action.
Notwithstanding the jurisdiction ot the na
tional courts—Supreme and Interior- -is liniiuoi;
they yet possess powers nnt granted by positive
law; not independent, but auxiliary'. For in
stance, although they have been vested by
statute with pow« r to indict punishmeut for con
tempts ; (act ui r.'itl. modified, alter the im
peachment oi Judge Peek , bv the net of 1831,)
still it J*« s cut .•>ti->u , cither front U.e -peculiar
constitution ol these coin is—their limited and
defined powers—or the statutes declaratory of
these powers, that they could not exercise.the
same authority without the aid of Acts of Con-
gtess ; tor tiie right to inflict summary punish
ment lor a contempt is an inherent one, and in
dispensable to all courts 01 justice.
Chief Justice Marshall, in the case ot The
United Stales vs. 1(1103011,7 Crane Ii, 32, said:
“Certain implied powers must necessarily result
to our courts ol justice, trom the nature ol their
institution. * * * * ; to line lor contempt;
to imprison tor contumacy; ealorce obedience
tojorder, Ac , are jaiweis which are necessary to
others ; and so tar, our courts, no doubt possess
powers not immediately derived from statutes.”
The first section of tbe art of A larch 30,1831,
empowers the several courts ot the United
Stales to issue attachments and inflict summary
punishment lor contempts of court, but this
power shall not extend to any cases except, Ac.,
* * * * “ and the disobedience or resistance
by any officer ol said courts, party, juror, or
witness, or any other person or persons, to any
law tu! writ, process, order, rule, decree, or com
mand ot the said courts." See aLo the act ol
1789.
It may he borne in mind that the section just
relerred to, gives tbe same power to the Judge
when acting under the authority ol these rev
enue statutes as is possessed by the national
courts themselves.
Unlike those courts which have their origin
in the common or unwritten law, the courts of
the United states were created by written law.
In thelormer, the jurisdiction is general, and all
the proceedings brought belore mem are pre
sumed to be within their cognizance until the
contrary appears. In the latter, the jurisdiction
is limited and defined, and they can take cogni
zance ol such proceedings only as are affirma
tively shown to be within their jurisdiction. Yet
they possess certain unexpressed powers inci-
dt ntal and appurtenant to all courts of judi
cature.
Comparing the provision in the 9tli section ol
the act ol July, 1866, with the act just quoted
and the act of 1789 relerred to, 1 have tailed to
perceive wherein the 9di section is inconsistent
with either ot those statutes. Tiie powers
granted by those acts are, I apprehend, suffi
ciently ample to enable the judge to carry into
eflect the provisions in the 9iU section ot the act
of 1866.
It was insisted that no court or tribunal could
punish lor eout< mpt, except lor violations ot its
owu orders This, as a general proposition, is
correct. But, iu proceedings under the 9th sec
liou of tbe actol 1866, the question ol Con
tempt would arise lor consideration, only when
some process or other lawful command ot the
judge waa disobeyed.
It was contended also, that the authority
claimed hy the supervtsoi to i»ue summons, re
quiting pereous to appear i-t-iore him is a judi
cial act. Tnai issuing a summons and requiring
persons to appear, testily under oath, pioduce
nooks, Ac , may tie, it taken in an extended sense
a judicial act, must, I think, be admitted. But
the mere issuing ol a. summons is in itself only
a ministerial act. Nor did Congress in using
the term “summoDs” in the 49tb section of the
act 01 1868, contemplate it to be or the legal dig
nity ol a writ, or other judicial process ; but
simply a notice—and similar m its nature to a
summons issued by an ovetseer of roads requir
ing persousto attend, with the necessary imple
ments, and to work ou the public highway.
His summons, a> h is already becu said, neglect
ed or disobeyed, bis authority ends. He must
then apply to the proper officer, as directed by
the 9Ui section of the act ol 1866, to entorce
obedience. And when the alleged delinquent is
brought before the judge, be will “pr.iceed to a
bearing ot the case;" aud then,and not till then,
can it be properly said that there is any exercise
ol judicial authority.
There exists in eveiy political s'-vereigu com
munity the inherent power ot guarding its own
existence and protecting and exalting the hap
piness and welfare ot its people at targe. This
soverrisn powt-r re known a- itieef-ineritch-ntiiiu f
ut lilt- l.uti )D 81 aie, ai d • IUM-ki : til.’ jiiiHcf
to appropriate the acqaisUXuns «.t cut.jcots or
citizens to public purposes, and to control and
preserve tbe relations ot social life—internal
polity or police, public ne&hh and public morals.
Generic with sue power of eminent domain is
tin 1—><i .<t taxation , ea«.L . 3 1 sent tally a
suviieitu atinuute, lodged m th. agerega e of
1 fie p -pt>\ u hi d the lignt ..1 c aitieatdomain
, a < re.-cd, n appropriates property exceeding
tbe ow ner's share ol < ouUibutton to the pufibc
burden, t axation is the piOporiional and rea
sonable assessment which may be imposed trom
time to time upon persons or property. The Na
tional Constitution prohibits ibetaL ngot private
property tor public nse without ju-t compensa
tion. The tax payer receives a lull and jast com
pensation lor fits share of contnlunioa to the
public necessity by the benefit conferred on him,
in the proper appropriation of the tax paid.'
Notwithstanding tluse two powers have, in
my judgment, & common origin, both being in
herent in tbe sovereign authority—the object oi
both being the sslety ami welfare ot the whole
community—yet the we glit of authority would
seem t«» tie that there exists a distinction be
tween these two modes oi taking individual
properly for public use. Tbe Hi*? Bridge Co.
vs. l)ix ei. <d, 6 How. 597. Brewster vs. Hough,
16 N. 11. 143, iu which.it was held “that the
power of taxation is essentially a power of sov
ereignty or eminent domain" But see Com-
m>nwealth v, Alger, 7 Cush. 53 ; aud WiHia -ns v.
Mayor of Detroit, 2 Mich., 560. Ttie direct
question has not—at least so tar as my knowl
edge extends—been decided by any ot tiie- Na
tional Courts. i>ee Slate of Few Jersey v ll’if-
soii, 7 Crancb, 164. 'Churns Iliier Bridge v.
Warren Bridge, et ul, 11 Peters 420.640 —Story
J. Oilman, v. City of Sheboygan, 3 Black, 510
But whether there is auy substantial dilleieuce
in principle, is not here a question requiring de
termination. It is euotign lor me on ibis occa
sion to declare, that Congress has not made any
provision tor trial, by jury, whether property tie
taken by right ot eminent domain, or by author
ity ol the taxing power.
It is nevertheless uoqueriiooable that when
the government appropriates inet 1 vidua! proper
ty lor public purposes, the obligation to make
Just compensation is concomitant ; but Con
gress is tbe sole judge ot le w the compensation
shall tie ascertained and paid. Aud as to the
executorial and summary modes employed tor
the collection ot taxer— fixed debts doe to the gov
eminent- although they cause a certain diver
sity iu “the laws ot Ihe land,” and although such
proceedings haw: hee.n sometimes questioned,
as iuiriuging the right ot trial by jury; never-
thele-s, it is, at this day, too well settled in this
country—and in England from time immemo
rial-to be now disputed. Moreover tbe collec
tion ol the excise *»r public taxes has never
been deemed a judicial, hut simply a ministerial
act. Murray's Lessie, et. al v. Hoboken Land
Improvement Co., 18 How. 272. Peirce v. City
of Boston, 3 Mete., 520.
Out ot the provision in the 49th Section of
the Act ol 1868. empowering a supervisor to ex
amine premises, and to issue summons requi
ring persons to appear belore him, testify uuder
oath, produce their books, papers, Ac.,—and
that part ol the 9th Section ot the Act ot July,
1866, w hich provides the mode of compelling
obedience to the summons—two questions arise
for adjudication. The one is based upon the
fourth amendment to the Constitution, which
aays "the right of the people to he secure in their
persons, houses, papers aud ellecls against un
reasonable searches aud seizures shail not be
violated, aud no warrants shall i93ue, but upon
probable caase, supported by oath or affirmation,
and particularly describing the place to be
searched, and the person or thing to be seized.”
The other is tound among the enumerated pri
vate rights in the fifth amendment, and is as fol
lows : No one shall “be deprived ot life, liberty
or property without due process of law.”
The rights ol personal security, personal lib
erty, and private properly— aud incidentally, the
near identity of w rits of assistance and general
warrants to the summons issued by the supervi
sor, were tully discussed.
Tbe introduction into the Constitution of the
provisions iu regard to search vvarrauts, was
doubtless occasioned by the strong teeling exci
ted lioth iu .England and America, Ironi the
practice ot issuing general warrants on bare
suspicion and without louudatiou, empowering
the officer to enter aud s* arch auy house, to
break open any receptacle, seize and carry
away all or any private papersorother property.
These abuses had continued for tu»uy j^ears
until, at length, in 1763, the Com t ol King’s
Bench, (then presided over by Lord Camden,)
in the case of Knlick v. Carrington, 2 Wile.,273,
declared then to be manifestly illegal. Vide
Buckle v. Money, Id, 206. Money"et. al va.
Leach, 1 W. Bla 555. Commonwealth vb. Dana
3 Mete., 829. Story on Const. Sect 1901. Sev
eral years anterior to the decision in Entick vs.
Can 1 nylon, the illegality of general warrants
had been eloquently maintained by James Oris
in Massachusetts, in the discussion had respect
ing writs of assistance. The writer of an able
article on Mr. Otis in the July (1869) num
ber ot the American Law Bevieio, gives a briel
histoiy ot these writs, derived Irom notes to
Quincy’s Reports, by Mr. Justice Gray ot the
Supreme Judicial Court ol Massachusetts. A
copy ol this writ may lie louud iu ihe at tide —
It authorised the person to whom it was issued,
to enter, accompanied by a Sheriff, Justice ol
the peace, or constable, any house, where un
customed goods were suspected to be concealed ;
and, it resistance was made, the writ empower
ed the searcher to break open the house and
seize the goods. These writs, modified in some
degree, are still ot force in England 3 Am.
Law Review 641. 4 Bancroft’s Hist. U. 8. 414
Conn-el for the Meadors contended, that, it
there was any distinction iu priuciple between
general search warrants or writs ot assistance
and the power claimed by the supervisor to en
ter and examine premises, and to issue summons
requiring persons to appear betore.him, Ac,
there was no difference iu their practical effect
— each being repugnant to the constitution and
all equally illegal.
The first point in' th° question presented for
decision, is as to the right ot the supervisor to
enter'and examine the premises. This power, as
already noticed, is giveu by the 49th section ot
the act ot 1868, and no warrant whatever is
made necessary belore entry and examination.
Hir Wm. BlaCkstone, speaking ol the excise
duty, which is an inland imposition upon com
modifies, charged in some eases, on the manu
lacturer, and in others, on the seller or dealer in
the manufactured articles, and answering sub
stantially to our system ol iuternal revenue or
taxes, says; “ The frauds that might be com
muted in this branch of revenue, unless a strict
watch was kept, make it necessary, wherever it
is established, to give the officers the power ot
entering and searching houses ot such as deal in
excisable commodities, at any 7 hour ot the day,
and in many oases the night likewise.” 1st Uom.
319. Such wa-> the law ol Engl uul and ot the
colonies prior to the war ol Independence, and
so it has continued to this day under the nation
al goverumeut, and in nearly every State of the
Union; and the) validity ot this apparently rig
orous law, in its'application to the inland reve
nue and the collection ot taxi s, has never vet
been successiully questioned. Vide Act ol Con
gress March 3,1791; 1st Stats RSO ; A< t of May 8,
1792 ; Id 267; Act of July 22, 1813 ; 3 Id 22, etc.
The sicoud point in the question, lor deter
mination, involves the right ut the supervisor to
issue summons requiring persons to come belore
him, to testify under oath, and to produce their
books, Ac , tor his inspection. The legal princi
ples which govern llie first point in Ibis ques
lion, are so closely blended wiili those wtiicb
control the second, that the answer given to the
first, might suffice lor this.
TUe objection made to the power given to the
supervisor by tbe statutes is, as just mentioned,
that it is forbidden by the fourth amendment to
the Constitution. But lhi3 is a civil proceeding,
and iu no wise does it partake of the character
ot a criminal prosecution; no offense is charged
agaiust the Meadors. Theretore in this pro
ceeding the fourth amendment is not violated.
Said Merrick, J.,in pronouncing the judgment
of the Court in Robinson and another v. Richard-
atm, Judge, 13 Gray, 454; “Search wan ants
were never recognized by the common law a3
processes which might be availed ol by indi
viduals in the couise ol civil proceedings, or for
the maintenance of any mere private right; but
their use was confined to'cases oi public prose
cutions, instituted aud pursued lor the suppres'
sion ol crime or the detection aud punishment
of criminals.” Murray's lessee v. Hoboken Laud
if Improvement Company, supra, 1 Bishop, Oim.
Procedure, sec. 716. i do not perceive any like
ness in principle between the summons issued
by the supervisor arid either general warrants or
writs of assistance.
'{’he second question in this branch ol the case
grows out of mat important private right se
cured to the citizen by the tilth amendment, that
fie 'i.i.l not “ be deprived ut ni<- iioeny or pro
perty w ilii *ut doc c i 1 - - oi la -V Ibis pro
vision is deduced i■ >,u ;u grand oii-ioui, too
29th chapter of the Great Charier, wbicfi pr.e
tected every individual in the free enjoyment of
his file, his liberty and his property, unless de
clared to be forfeited by the judgment of his
peers, or the law of the land. By “law of the
land” was probably meant the ancient Saxon
common law.
In Murray's Lessee et al. v. H-b ken Land Im
provement Company, supra, it was said by Mr.
Justice CLBTis, iu delivering the judgment of
the Court. “ The words ; due process of law ’
■r
were undoubtedly intended to convey the same
meaning mi itiA words ‘ hv the law of the land.*”
meaning as the words * by tb
it the converse ot this lie true, the phrase “ bg
the law of the land" imports a meaning as com
prehensive as “due process ol law,” and conse
quently’ includes, like the latter, trial by jury.
But neither—even iu au enlarged sense—means
mat, to deprive a man of his lile, Uis liberty or
his property by means of the law in its regular
administration’through courts ot justice, the iq-
tervention ol a jury is, it, all cases, necessary.
Take, lor instance, the esse of a person indicted
for a capital or other ofleose, and who, on ar
raignment, instead of pleading “ not' guilty ” to
the charge, elects (inr reasons satisfactory to
himsell) to plead “gutllv;" ii the indictment be
sufficient in law, the Court awards judgment
agaiust him; and ibis is judgment "by
the law ol the land,” and as lawful Uu
der tiie Constitution, a* it lie had been tried and
loumt guilty by the judgment ol his peers. So,
if a j*t-rson stands in contempt oi the court, the
couit summarily punishes him hy line aud iui-
prisonmenl, «>r either, thus depriving him ot
his piojieriv, or bbeity, or Lilli, without a trial
by jury. Aud it may l>e remarked that it the
imprisonment be tor a time certain, executive
pardon is Use only mode ot releasing him, before
the expiraliou ol his'sentence. >, in cases of
lemurrer or special verdict, or where a person
makes default,or confesses judgment; and so
too iu equity causes where trial by jury is quite
uuusuai-, rnt’u are deprived of their property.
Other instances could readily be given to show
that the word , “hy the law ot the laud,”—“due
process of law** donut necessarily import a jury
trial as essential in every case to deprive a per
son ot his life, lilierty or pr perty. indubitable
proof of this may be tound in the case ot Mur
ray's Lessee ei al v. Hiboken Lend Improvement
Co, supra.
Thai case arose out ot the act of May 5,1820
3 Stats. 592. The main question was, whelber-
the.issuing, by the Solicitor ot the Treasury, of
what was denominated in the statute, a war,
rant ot distress, against a delimiting collector of
revenue, whs in conflict with the Constitution.
The court h<Id the law to b - valid and not in
consistent with tbe Constitution The decision
was placed mainly on the ground that the auciet t
common law ol England recognized a suiuin ry
remedy lor the recovery ot debts due to tbe
government. Se>- Martin v. Mott, 12 VVbeat, 19
United States v. Ferreira, 13. How. 40.
It was further insisted that the power given to
the supervisor is violative of that clause in the
tilth amendment to the Constitution which de
clares that no one shall be compelled in any
criminal case to lie a witness agaiust himsell,
This clause, tike that iu the foaith amendment
in reference to search warrants, is applicable to
crimiual cases only.
And here a thought sugge.-ti itself. As the
Meadors subsequently to the passage ot this
Actol July 26,1868, applied, lot and obtained
from the government a license or permit to deal
in; manufactured tobacco, snuff, and cigars, 1 am
inclined to be of theopiuiou that they are, by’ this
their owu voluntary act, precluded from assail
ing the constitutionality of this law, or other
wise controverting it. For the graniing ot a
license or pernrit—the yielding ol a particular
privilege—and its acceptance by the Meadors,
was a contract in which it. was implied that the
provisions of the statute which governed, or in
any way affected their business, and all other sta
tutes previously passed, which were m pari ma
teria with those provisions, should he recognized
and obeyed by them. \V lien the Meadors sought
and accepted ihe privilege, the law was before
them. Aud can they now iurpugu ils consti
tutionality or rduse to obey its provisions aud
stipulations, and so exempt themselves Irom the
consequences ot their own acts?
Theaeiuternal revenue or tas laws were char
acterized as being not only repugnant to the
Constitution hut also unreasonably burdensome.
With the most minute attention i examined
tlios |...i ;i n of the Acts of July 13, 1866 and
July 26, 186 . presented lor my eouBideration ;
aadcareluiiy sou; oi to ascertain w hether they
were in conflict « ■ u any ol the provisions of
tbs Constitution. Mt * omlusiou on that question
has been expressed 1 do not concur wilh coun
sel, that these laws are unreasonably burden
some. But even if ibev are, nay, even if they
are oppressive, and uuju .1 modes are employed
tor their eulorccurcnl. tin rcme.lv lies with Con
gress, and not in ii.<- dull. toy. By enacting
these laws Congo as 1.1 exercised ilia couslitu
tional power ot taxation and the courts have no
power to interfere. Providence Bank os. Billings,
4 Peters, 514 Fa tension-of‘ Hancock Street, 18 Penn
(6 Harris) 26. Kirby vs Shaw, 19 LI 258. Liv
ingston rs 1/1 ■ of .Yew York, 8 Wend. 85. In.
the m ith .. 1 ..p. ning Furnuiit strict. 17 Id. 649.
ll.-i . .-ck cs Randolph, 13 Verm. 529. in Mc-
Cn.iodi os. Maryland, Chid Justice M akhhai.i.
said, that it is as “uutit lor the judicial depart
ment to inquire what degree of taxation is the
legitimate use, and what degr.-e nity amount to
the abuse of the power "
Thus it w ill be seen that there are many cases
in which the right ol property must be made
subservient to the public welfare. The. maxim
of the law is, that a private mischief is to be
endured rather than a public inconvenience.
Oa this ground tests the right ol public neces
sity. 2 Kent, 336. Aral it is well to bear iu
mind that the National Government is supreme
within its constitutional hums, lor to it, is in
trusted the paramount iufi-iest ot the whole
nation.
Iu declaring and < allying into ett. 11 tiie laws,
my action,as a judge,w i'll e.vci tie “ton e the least
possible power ad> quale to (lie end proposed.”
Yet, let no one lii-sb ite to do homage to The
Law; the very least as feeling her care, a d llu-
greatest as not > \ciupu-d irom her power.
It is order.d that tfic sn.l Jotiu f Meador,
Newton J Meador and .1 mien G. Meador, com
posing the firm ot Meador >v. Brothels, dealers
.n tobacco, in obedience to tiie summons ot the
supervisor, appear lorthw-iib belore him, and
answer under o ah, touening 1 he receipt, stor ure,
delivery or sile tu m ■ firm ot M. 1 lor A Broth
ers, between the 2d ii day m July 1868, an I the
1st Jay ot July 1369, ol any aud i.ll tobacco
which came to ti.eir pos e -.ton or under their
control in the w-iyol b isiuess.durintr said period
And, also, that they, at the same tune, produce
to the said supervisor all hooks and papers ot
said firm, specified iu said summon’, which con
tain any entry, statement, 01 c nnmuuioaiion
touching or in any manner relating to tobacco.
And ii is lurlber ordered that the clerk file
this opinion iu iiis office, and, ihai on payment
ot his iee, he lurnish to th - supirvisir a copy
ot the same cerfifi -d under iiL official seal
Atlanta, Ga , August 25, 1859
Our Weekly local Department.
Savattnnli Income Reiurua.
It seems trom au article in the Savannah Ad
vertiser that there are “fifty"two per-ons who
return incomes ot ■five thousand dollars and up
wards, ranging as high as two hundred and
three thousand seven hundred and filly dollars.
The large majority return incomes ot a l.Ule
over one thousand dollars. Printers, with one
exception, are very poor, and return no income
stall. Doctors are al.-o an impecunious class,
and work day and night without accumulating
a large lortune. Lawyers are not overburdened
with large incomes, which may he owing to the
backwardness in clients la not 'settling up
promptly. Editors ain’t worth a continental—
being even poorer than printers. The richest
man in bsvannahbelongs 10 ihe mercantile pro-
lession. One w idow returns nineteen thousand
and ibrty-aix dollars income.”
Cattle Plague—The Knoxville Press &
Hera'd, ol the 21st, f avs that a disease among
tne cattle in Upper East Tennessee, which first
made its appearance at Bristol, is, it is said
tpreadiug, and imbibers are dying.
Tbe Wafer Famine, in Tliituilelpbia.
'l lie drought iu Philadelphia si'll continues j
not a drop ot rain having fallen since the riight
ol the great whisky fire, August 4, when 30,-
000 barrels of whisky were destroyed. The
supply of water in Fairmouut water works has
become alarmingly scare.:. The City Council
ou Ton-day la-i, donated f25.006 to the desti
tute {amities- _
An Oi d Buck — t 'ommodore^ sn.lerbilt mar-
r.e i a .Mi-, Crawf rd. Mobile, Ala., a lew
uay s since, ilia iird v. tie Las been dead but a
few monttis, aud Le is s. veniy-five and better.
Paving Well.—The earnings of the Central
Pacific Railroad for July were $579,000, an in
crease oi 4,25,060 over the month of June. Not
withstanding the successive reduction of rates,
the result 01 operations ot the that three months
since the connection of the Eiaiein lines shows
a revenue ot $7,060 000 per annum, ot which
$3,000,000 is net.
Oeatit It 0111 Heat.
Oar exchanges from every' direction contain
accounts of deaths from heat. Several persons
died in Washington city :.nd its vicinity on the
24 th insU
The lime and cement quarries near Kingston,
ship daily over two hundred bushels of iime.
j Georgia Press Convention.—The above
body met to day iu tbe City Council Chamfer,-
the lollowiug officers vre-re elected :
President, Joseph Clisby, ot the Macon Tele
graph; Vice-Presidents, J. II. Christy, ot the
Athens WatchmanA. If. Wriglit, of the
Chronicle <£• Semtinel; aud H. II. Jones, ot the
Cutlibert Appeal; Secretaries, 0. H. C. Wil
lingham and A. R. Watson.
Upon registering names the following were
enrolled :
Macon Telegraph and Monroe Advertiser.—
Joseph Clisby.
Athens Watchman.—J. H. Christy.
Atlanta Constitution.—I. W. Avery and W. A.
Hemphill.
Albany Neu-.—C. W. Styles.
Chronicle it Sentinel—A. R. Wright and H.
Moon.
Central Georgian.—J. Medlock.
Constitutionalist.—I. W. Call.
Journal <£ Meisenger.—T. A. Burke.
Columbus Enquirer. —T. Ragland and J. W.
Marlin.
Intelligencer.—J. L Whitaker and J. H. Steele.
Hancock Journal—W. H. Royal and Dubose.
Marietta Journal.—Neill.
American. Union.—j. C. Swaze.
Georgia Enterprise.-—W. L. Beebe and J. W.
Anderson.
Cuthbert Appeal—H. H. Jones.
Hawkinsvi'.le Dispatch—D. W. D. Bouily,
. Lagrage Reporter—C. H. C. Willingham.
Greensboro Herald—H. M. Burns
Newnan Herald— J. C. Wooten.
Athens Banner— 8. Adkinaon and M. Pulton.
Madison Examiner—T. H. Broh-.tou.
Americas Courier—E. H. Christian.
Rome Courier—YL. Dwintll.
GrijJin Star—F. B. Fitch.
Day School Visitor—3. 8. Shecut.
Covington Examiner—W. A. Harp
Farm Journal— J. F. Shecut.
Washington Gazette—J. H. Wright.
Dawson Journal—8. R. Weston.
. Christian Index—3. J. Toon.
Atlanta Medical di Surgical Journal—3. G.
Westmoreland.
Rural Southerner— Sam. Echols.
ScolCs Magazine—T3. B. Crew.
Sumter Republican—C. W. Hancock.
Middle Georgian - 8. Burr.
On motion of C. W. Styles, the following
committees were appointed: l. Committee ou
Permanent Organization ; 2. On Legal and Gen
era! Advertising; 3. On Agencies, and Cash amt
Credit Sys'em f 4. On Constitution, By-Laws
and Rules; 5. On The Press. Each committee
to consist of five members.
Major Steele amended the motion: That llie
committees report to the Convention during the
next session, which will assemble some day de-
signaled hy the President, at Macon during the
week ol the Fair in November.
On motion of Colonel Styles, Mr. Fleming, of
the Charleston Courier and New York World
was invited to take a seat in the Convention.
Colon cl Fulton, of Clarke, delivered a mes
sage In.m Messrs. Glenn, Wright A Carr, to
visit their warerooms and examins a cotton
press. Accepted.
On motion ot Col. Styles, the Mayor and
City Council of Atlanta, were invited to tske
seats in the Convention.
On motion oi Mr. Moore, the Convention re
turned thanks to Col. Hulbert, and accepted
his generous invitation to make an excursion
over his nmd, and to other points designated,
Ou motion ot Mr. Christian, the thanks ot
the Convention were tendered the City Council
lor the use of their hall; also, lor an invitation
to tide around the city.
On motion of Col. Jones, thanks were re
turned to the citizens and merchants of Atlanta
for courtesies.
On motion ol Major Steele, thanks were re
turned to Col. Clisby lor the able, efficient and
courteous manner in which he had presided
over the convention ; also to the Secretaries, for
their politeness in perforimg their duties.
Couventiomadjourued. until 8 o’clock, p. m.
Pre-s Convention—Alter our report of the
Press Convention was made, the Committees
were'appoint! d, which were as follows:
on Permanent Organization—Messrs. Hemp
hill, Medlock, Burke, Whitaker and Atkinson.
Ou Constitution, By-Laws and Rules—Messrs
Styles, Hancock, Fitch, Weston and Pound.
On 1-fates of Legal Advertising, and of Rates
of Ad vertising Generally—Messrs. Willingham,
Burr, Dwinell, Russell, and Christian.
On System of Agfncies, and the Cash and
Cic-Jit System.—Messrs. Martin, Harp, Moore,
Avery and Call.
Tluse Committees are to report at Macon.
The Convention after referring some unfinished
business to the Macon Meeting, adjourned Tues
day night at 10 o'clock.
Upon the adjournment of the Convention,the
members of tbe press and invited guests re-as-
semhlcd at the Hall upon an invitation from
Col. Hulsey, and spent au hour or two in an ex
ceedingly pleasant and agreeable manner toast
ing, ?.nd speech making, partaking of various
contributions, generously sent in by his honor,
Mayor Hulsey, McBride A Co., G. W. Jack,
Glenn, Wright A Car, Massey A Landsell, Beer-
muu A Kuliil, Meadows A Bro., and M. E. Ken
ney.
We notice that a tew of our merchants are
receiving early lull goods. We never wonld
have kuop/n it, had we not been passing by their
store houses and witmssed the fact. Since our
residence iu Atlanta we have been surprised to
see that so lew of our merchants advertise.—
Why this is so, «e have hea' d no reason. They
act and taik as if they hive objections to per
sons knowing what articles they keep—seem to
attach some secret Li their business. The sum
mer will soon p:isi hy, anil we can point out
stores now where they have a pretty good sup
ply ot spring goods on hand. They can blame
no one, lor it was not known that these mer
chants had goods.
The experieiw e o! wise aud prudent business
men through 1 lie country is, that it pays to ad
vertise. It has started many a man on the road
to fortune. The experience of other localities
holds good ol A'imta. We are acquainted
with.sever-al gem'nmea in the city, who say
they first gained a foothold in business by judi
cious advertising. Th .s are one or two Dreg'
stores iu oar city, in. names of the tians own
ing them are ai i .m i o over North Georgia as
household woids. lias advertising paid them:t
There are Candy manulactuieiS in Atlanta, who
have liberally and extensively advertised, dal
they gain by it ? Reader, to-day, let a stranger
accost you on the street, and ask where he can
find a Candy establishment, or a Jewelers, or a
Drug store, where do you refer him 1 is it to
some unknown house, or some of the well adver
Used establishments of the city r
Think over the wealthy men of Atlanta, and
you will find that they made-known their name9,
their business, and have added to their wealth
hy freely using printers ink.