Newspaper Page Text
OLO SERIES—VOI. ICI
NEW SERIES—¥OI. XL.
VKHMB.
iHE DAILY CHI. MiII LE £ SENTINEL, the
oldevt Devip|>er in (lie South, is published
daily, except Monday, Terms: Per year,
$lO ; six months, $5; three months, (2 SO.
THE WEEKLY i HBONICLE A SENTINEL is
published every Wednesday. Terms : One
year, $2; six months. sl.
THE TRI-WEEKLY CHRONICLE A SENTI
NEL is published every Tuesday, Thursday
and Saturday. Terms: One year, $5; six
months. $2 SO.
BCUacßirnoNH in all cases in advance, and
no paper continued alter the expiration of
the time paid for.
RATES OP ADVERTISING IN DAILY.—AII
transient advertisements will be charged at
the rate of $1 per square each insertion for
the first week. Advertisements in Tri-Week
ly. $1 per square; in Weekly. $1 per square.
Marriage and Funeral Notices. $1 each.
Special Notices, $1 per square. Special rates
will be made for advertisements running for
•ne month or longer.
ALL COMMUNICATIONS announcing candi
dates for office—from County Constable to
members of Congress—will be charged at the
rate of twenty cents per line. All announce
ments must be paid for in advance.
Address WALSH A WRIGHT,
Cnaovici.K A Sentinel. Augusta, Ga.
Ctjronicle and Sentinel.
WEDNESDAY APRIL 26, 1876.
The political atmosphere is surcharged
with corruption. There are very few of
the Radical leaders whose skirts are not
besmirched with fraud and peculation.
The Darien Gazelle would like to see
Gen. A. R. Lawton sent to St. Louis as
a delegate from the State at large. The
Chronicle and Sentinel warmly sec
onds the nomination of Gen. Lawton.
A oentleman at LaGraDge writes: “I
have been a subscriber to the Chronicle
and Sentinel since I left your city, and
propose to continue so as long as I am
able. Your paper is the best that bas
ever been published in Georgia.”
The New York Tribune is authority
for the report that ex-Governor Ames is
said to be going into the lumber bnsi
noss in Minnesota. Cau’t he induce
father-in-law Butler to join him ? The
country would bid them GoD-speed if
they would devote themselves to lupber
and let statesmanship alone.
How would Judge Augustus Reese, of
Morgan, do as a Centennial candidate
for Governor? He is one of the purest
men in Georgia. He does not seek po
litical preferment, bat that is so much
the more reason why political prefer
ment should seek him. He would make
a good Governor.
The New York World says: “What
ever may be the trnth of the story that
comes to ns this morning from Indian
apolis, it may be well to remember that
Mr. Blaine and the Union Pacific’s cor
ruption fund have already appeared in
public iu the same connection. Mr.
Blaine was smirched with the Credit
Mobilier dirt, and it is rather more
likely than not that he is in this job
too."
The President having informed At
torney-General Pierrepont of some de
velopments msde before the grand jury
in the Babcock matter, the latter gen
tleman exclaimed wonderingly, “How
did you find this out ? The members of
the grand jury are all sworn not to re
veal anything.” "That may be,” re
plied the President., “but I am not sworn
not to hear anything.”
We publish elsewhere, this morning,
a communication signed “Old Whig,”
which strongly advocates the nomina
tion of Hon. Hehsouel V. Johnson as
the Democrotio candidate for Governor
of Georgia. The writer is a well known
and prominent citizen of Putnam, and
we feel assured speaks the sentiments of
the peiple of that county.
The Atlanta Constitution complains
that Foster Blodgett declines to be in
terviewed, keeps his secrets to himself
and only puts them to paper for the
purpose of refreshing his memory.
Does not the Constitution know that as
soon as Aladdin lost the possession of
his lamp he also lost his power and fell
under tho dominion of the Wicked Ma
gioian. So likewise, if Mr. Blodgett
should disclose his secrets, his power
would be destroyed, and tha slaves of
the Box would fear him no longer.
We received a letter from a gentle
man the other day renewing his sub
scription to the Chronicle and Sentinel
for the forty-third, year. There have
been a good many changes since onr
subscriber sent in his first subscription.
In 1838 Andrew Jackson ruled the
country with an iron hand; the great
contest with the United States Bank
was waging, and Clay, Webster, Cal
houn and Forsythe thundered in the
Senate. Then the two great parties
whioh fought for the possession oi the
Government were known as Whigs and
Democrats, and the Chronicle was the
acknowledged Whig organ of the South.
General Babcock may be an innocent
mau, but it cannot be denied that he
has been on very intimate terms with
some of the worst men in the country.
His friends Joyce, McDonald, Avery
and others aro the convicted thieves of
the whisky ring. He had dealings with
detectives Bell and Whitley, and with
bad characters like Miles, the burglar, j
For an innocent man, Gen. Babcock has !
been strangely mixed up with the most
uupriucipled knaves and thieves in the
oountry. As President Grant is re
ponsible for saying, “Let no guilty man
escape,” we hope Gen. Babcock will be
puniaLoJ it guilty y lint, fnr tha intimate
relations he has occupied toward the
President, we desire that he should es
tablish his innocence.
The intimation that the improved |
weather, extending as it does now to the :
West, must speedily stimulate business
in that section, is supported by mail ad- ,
vices from the principal trade centres, I
more especially by paragraphs like this j
from the Chicago Inter-Ocean : “The :
“ weather for the past few days has been
“ the means of imparting more life and ;
“ activity in the general merchandise i
“ trade of the city, and the amount of
“ business transacted shows a steady
“ daily increase. The country roads
“ are rapidly improving, the interior
“ trade increasing, and as aoonsequence
“ interior merchants are obliged to in
" crease and replenish their stocks.
•* During the coming week our leading
•** merchants anticipate a very active
4 ‘ trade, and it is more than probable
■“ that their expectations will be real
*' ized.”
The New York Sun thinks the Demo
cratic party will not be well advised if
it nominates General Hancock. It says
that the country has had enough of
military Presidents for the present cen
tury, and that the President elected in
the Centennial year should not be a
military man. This may all be true
enough ; but General Hancock has been
tried in very delicate and important af
fairs and not found wanting. The peo
ple of the South are kindly disposed to
General Hancock. The Democrats, in
Auiei to be successful, must nominate a
candidate against whose war record not
A word ean be said. If the contest has
to be fought on this line Hancock wonld
make a gallant standard bearer for the
iparty. If he can whip the fight, the
South would not hesitate to BHpport
him. But the South will be satisfied
with any good man that is n cnutated.
mercantile failures.
We are indebted to Mr. Isaac R. Har
by, the active and efficient agent in
Georgia of the Mercantile Agency of
Messrs. R. G. Dun & Cos., for a copy of
their report showing the failures in the
United States and Canada for the first
quarter of the current year. The num
ber of failures is 2,806, and the liabili
ties are $64,644,156, against 1,733 fail
ures and $38,873,222 liabilities for the
first quarter in 1875 an increase in the
number of failures of 1,073, and in lia
bilities of $26,000,000. In the Southern
States, Georgia comes to the front with
68 failures, and $2,080,276 “gone where j
the woodbine twineth” ; South Carolina j
reports 40 failures and the loss of
$725,858; Louisiana, with 12 failures,
reports $553,425 liabilities; Alabama
bas 22 failures and 8256,300 liabilities ;
Mississippi 30 failures and $311,046 lia
bilities. The failures in other Southern
States are comparatively light. New York
city reports 313 failures with $9,513,548
liabilities ; New York State supplements
this with 282 failures and $6,035,968 lia
bilities. The city of Boston reports 114
failures, with a loss of $6,157,000, and
Massachusetts helps out Boston with
154 failures and $4,022,560. The city
of Philadelphia, with 34 failures, is
behind $1,322,220, and the State of
Pennsylvania increases this with 139
failures and $3,125,171. The city of
Chicago reports 52 failures, with liabili
ties of $3,097,200, and the State of Illi
nois adds to this with 132 failures and
$2,962,500. *The cities of St. Louis and
Cincinnati and the States of Missouri
and Ohio contribute their quota to
commercial distress of the country.
Even from the golden slopes of the Pa
cific comes the sound of commercial
crash. Every State, except one, Ten
nessee, has contributed to the financial
embarrassment of the country. There
has been a very great increase in the
number and amount of failures—much
larger, indeed, than was expected. The
following is copied from the circular be
fore us :
The figures which we present here
with do not give much encouragement
to the belief that the return of a pros
perous condition is any nearer, except
in the passage of time, than a year ago.
The business of the country, in every
department, continues to be restricted
to the narrowest limits ; without a cor
responding reduction in expenses, and
in the face of declining prices of all
staples, the possibilities of profit have
been slight indeed. It is, therefore, not
a matter of surprise, that so many have
succumbed to the pressure of the times;
the wonder rather is, that with all the
discouragement which in the past two
or three years have been experienced,
so many survive in a condition of ap
parent stability. When all the circum
stances are considered it should not
create surprise that the statistics of fail
ures show a marked increase in seasons
like the present. A condition of ex
pansion, such as the large expenditures
of the war induced, and which a vastly
increased currency caused to be perpetu
ated, could not take place without stim
ulating trade unduly, and causing such
large numbers to enter commercial pur
suits as to crowd all avenues of business
with more than an adequate number even
when trade was at its best. But now
that there is but little business to be
done beyond supplying the restricted
wants of the people, the excessive num
ber in trade must be lessened, and in
the struggle for existence the doctrine
of the survival of the fittest receives a
fresh illustration. It is to be deplored
that the large army of traders, whose
services are no longer required, cannot
retire from the field, except through
failure. The voluntary withdrawals
from business are iu far less proportion
than they should be, in view of the great
reduction in its extent.
Although failures are generally re
garded as the most marked Indication
of a bad condition of trade, it appears
as though this is the only process by
which the number engaged can be less
ened, so that those who remain may
profit enough to yield a living. It seems
very unpromising that such a considera
tion should be urged as an indication of
possible improvement in the condition
of business ; yet, even from this process,
very little hope can be derived, owing to
the facility with which compromises are
effected. The very men who have de
monstrated their lack of success are
those only who make money in these
hard times. By purchasing their assets
from their creditors at a low figure, a
sufficient capital is not uufrequently
yielded to continue in business, but al
ways to the detriment of those who are
endeavoring to discharge their obliga
tions in full. In this view it is a na
tional calamity that the Bankrupt Law
iB in its present condition. The wise
and liberal principle which this law is
intended to maintain, is abused by the
mistakes in its enactment, and the
facility which it affords to the debt
or, by judicious manipulation, to dic
tate terms to the creditor, who thereby
loses control of his own property, and a
disposition is not uufrequently made of
it, entirely foreign to,his wishes and op
posed to his convictions. The many con
siderations whioh cause creditors to
yield to the solicitations of debtors for a
compromise of their indebtedness are
sufficiently strong to keep the ranks full
of those who have failed to succeed; but
encouragement to fraudulent failures,
and well defined attempts to make mo-
ney by this class of misfortunes, were
certainly never contemplated by the law.
Such, however, is the result, and, added
to all the limitations and difficulties of
business of the present time, is this mis
fortune, that while failures are numerous,
the excessive number engaged in a re
stricted trade lessen slowly, fraud is en
couraged, and the chances of success for
upright and capable merchants are di
minished by the failure and subsequent
settlement at a trifling dividend of the
weak in capacity and the poor in capital.
As to the consequences of liberal settle
ments upon the parties themselves
mostly beuefitted, we cannot do better
than give insertion to the following
sensible remarks from a recent number
of the New York Shoe and Leather Re
porter :
“A ready and indiscriminate accept
ance of any proposition of compromise
ia a dangerous expedient. The dread of
failure and of tne gloomy consequences
it involves, ought to be one of the most
effectual checks against improvidence
and recklessness in trade. With all the
safeguards that can be interposed, the
propensity to overtrade and speculate
brings about an annual barvest of sus
pensions. But if it gets to be under
stood that when a man stops payment
he has only to settle np as best he may,
and go on again, the dismay which the
thought of bankruptcy occasions will
soon become sentimental. And
the comparative ease with which he has
passed through the trying ordeal, en
courages him to incur fresh hazards
which are very likly to bring him to
the same fate once more. The second
collapse is much less mortifying than
the first, and, if after that anything goes
wrong, why, the interruption gets to be
quite a matter of course, and is endured
with positive oomplacency.”
Prominence has been given to the
foregoing subject ou this occasion, be
cause of its growing influence on the
figures of failures which it seems our
province to furnish. That these figures
will continue to be large, and that they
will increase, connot be donbted if en-
I oonragement is afforded to failure by a
ready acquiescence in the demand of
j every debtor, and unless some decided
i stand is taken by the merchants them-
selves to lessen the number in business,
by refusing to continue those therein
who by their own confession have shown
themselves unfit.
Notwithstanding that all the ability
of this great nation of inventors has for
the past three years been intent upon
the discovery of some plan whereby
trade can be restored to a normal con
dition, no theory has yet been found
that exactly fits the case or accomplishes
the result. The progress toward a pros
perous condition, which at first was
thought might be rapid, it is now gen
erally considered must be exceedingly
gradual. Still further, it is a growing
conviction that a better and safer con
dition of trade can only be brought
about by a reduction of values to their
lowest possible point, and hence there
are those who hail as a good sign every
quotation of lower prices indicating a
possibility oi eoonomy in living, and a
return to rates for all staples such ss
prevail in other quarters of the globe.
How far a restricted currency, and an
approach to specie payments, will con
tribute to this result, it is needles to say;
but even in anticipation of that most
desirable consummation, the tendency
; to lower prices for everything is to many
! the most hopeful sign of the times. That
this tendency is most marked there is
1 ho denying, but in order to show its ex
tent, as compared with the prices pre
vailing in 1873, we have grouped to
gether some figures which may be found
interesting. It must be borne in mind
that these figures are entirely applicable
to wholesale purchases.
There is not much in the present out
look to encourage the hope of immedi
ate revival of business. The Spring
trade generally has been very disap
pointing both in extent and profit, and
the backwardness of the season retards
a demand for goods which it was thought
might follow the regular season's pur
chases. There is, however, a steady
realization from producers of their sta
ples, indebtedness is gradually being
reduced, and economy is everywhere
the feature of the hour. There is a
general conviction that bottom ha? been
touched, and that with the permanent
opening of navigation and the necessary
activities of the Centennial year, anew
start will be made which, though not
accomplishing great results within a
short time, will yet be hopeful of indi
cations for the future.
TIIE REPUBLICAN PROGRAMME.
The Republicans of Georgia are reported to
be thinking of disbanding as an organization
and uniting themselves as ‘‘independents”
with a faction of the Democratic party Their
theory is that as a party they can never hope
to succeed in the State, but that it they adopt
a policy of non-resistance the Democrats will
certainly spirt into two factions, with one of
which they can unite.
We find the above paragraph circulat
ing in Northern and Western exchanges.
We have never believed that the Re
publicans intended putting a candidate
in the field for Governor. They know
very well that a Republican cannot be
elected, and they have no men of aDy
prominence in their ranks ambitious of
defeat. They are playing a deeper and
a better game. They know wherein
the strength of the Democracy is proving
a source of weakness, and they are pre
paring to take advantage of this knowl
edge. With such a large number of
eager aspirants as are now in the field it
will be difficult to make a nomination
that will give general satisfaction and
command the solid support of the party.
A nomination may be doubtless follow
ed by an independent movement, and
the announcement of a strong indepen
dent candidate, and then the Republi
cans will see that a chance is presented
for regaining their lost influence and
power. 'The hope of the Democracy lies
in the nomination of a man who will
command the entire strength of the par
ty-
GOVERNOR JOHNSON’S POSITION.
A reporter for the Constitution saw a
gentleman the other day who has re
cently seen Hon. Herschfl V. John
son, and in the course of his conversa
tion had broached the subject of the
Gubernatorial situation, and asked Mr.
Johnson about his reported willingness
to receive the succession. Governor
Johnson said he had never given any
color to any of the extravagant reports
recently circulated through the press
concerning his willingness to re-assume
Gubernatorial honors and burdens. He
had been once seriously approached up
on that subject, and upon that occasion
had only made a conditional statement,
very much to this effect: That if “the
people demanded his services,” as those
who approached him insisted, he, as a
good citizen, could not refuse to give
them. But he explained that he had no
idea that the people of Georgia would
soon coma to that point where they would
demand any one man above all others
as a necessity of their situation. Hence,
his declaration was but remotely appli
cable to the present Gubernatorial race.
Other considerations of value to his peo
ple, our informant said, were urging Gov
ernor Johnson to continue in his present
position, and that his personal interests
were against his accepting higher duties
and burdens, and that the Governor had
so stated.
THE CHANCE AT CINCINNATI.
A Washington correspondent of the
New York Tribune furnishes that jour
nal with a statement of the strength of
the rival candidates for the Republican
nomination for the Presidency on the
first ballot in the National Convention,
as claimed by their friends, aEd an esti
mate of what vote the facts, so far as
known, make it probable they will get.
The statement and estimate are as re
markable for the inaccuracies of the
figures they contain as for anything
else. Thus the vote which Blaine’s
partisans claim as certain is placed in
the aggregate at 246, though States and
Territories are mentioned which are en-
titled to 256 delegates and votes in the
National Convention. The Blaine men,
it is said, also expect to get other States
which have 84 votes, but unless the
respresentation is in some manner cur
tailed they will have 88 votes in the Na
tional Convention. The aggregate of
the certain and doubtful Blaine vote is
made, by some wonderful mathematical
process, to reach 334, and, more won
derful still, it is said that this is within
31 of enough to nominate him, although
the Convention will have 752 members,
and with a full vote 377 will be necessa
ry to make a nomination. The corres
pondent, sifting the estimates, assigns
256 votes to Mr.. Blaine, and enumer
ates States and Territories, including
part of New York and part of Massachu
setts, which have in the aggregate 314
delegates, lie assigns 188 votes to
Morton, which is within two of a cor
rect estimate on the basis of the vote of
the States and Territories he has named.
He assigns Habtranft the vote of Penn
sylvania, Hayes the vote of Ohio, Conk
lino 50 votes from New York and possi
bly the 18 votes of New Jersey, while
Bristow’s strength is placed at less than
75 votes on the first ballot. The pros
pects, as viewed from a Washington
level, are said to strongly favor Mr.
Blaine.
A Republican journal cogently re
marks: It is time that President Grant
understood that so long as he allows
Babcock to remain at the head of an
important departments the District of
Columbia he has only himself to blame
if he is regarded as a partaker in Bab
cock’s iniquity. If the President cares
for the goo a opinion of his truest
friends he will make haste to have Bab
cock retired to private life, and he will
recall the young consul who received
his appointment as a reward for his
father’s betraying the Becrets of the
grand jury room.
The Eatonton Messenger is out for
Johnson. It says: “As there seems to
be an undercurrent from every portion
oi the State favoring the nomination of
ex-Gov. J ohnson, we would almost wager
that he will be the next nominee for
Governor. We have yet to see the man
who is not willing to place this true,
tried and faithful patriot at the head of
the State government. The least inti
mation from him of his willingness to
serve the people as their chief executive
will seenre his nomination, and his elec
tion would not only be certain, but glo
riously triumphant Indeed, we doubt
if the Republican party would even
bring oat a candidate against him. Ex-
Gov. Johnson is a great and good man
whom Georgians delight to honor.”
AUGUSTA, GA., WEDNESDAY MORNING, APRIL 26, 1876.
LYNCH LAW IN GEORGIA.
So far the men who were concerned
in the release of Joe Morris have not
been arrested or detected. We have no
doubt that the men who released him
from Stephens’ Pottery, where he was
at labor with other convicts, murdered
him after they had taken him away.
We are glad to know that the officers of
the State entertain the same opinion,
and that Governor Smith has ordered a
thorough investigation of the crime,
with a view to the punishment of the
guilty parties. The story circulated
at first, and which said that Mobkis was
released by men of his own oolor, was too
absurd to be credited. He was captured
by a band of men who intended to kill
him, and who in all probability carried
out their design. The men who did this
lawless deed can and should be deteoted
and pnnished. It is said that Morris
was a bad and a dangerous mao, and
that, while there was not sufficient legal
evidence against him to ensure his oon
viotion, there is good reason for believ
ing that Morris did attempt to incite
insurrection last Summer in Middle
Georgia. Probably these things are all
true, but granting their truth, there is
no excase for the crime that has evi
dently been committed. If there was
not sufficient legal testimony against the
man to cause his conviction [he should
not have been punished. The example
set by such a proceeding is in the high
est degree dangerous to society. If the
precedent be established that the opin
ions of a mob are to supplant the wi&e
and just principles of the law then the
life of no man is safe and every one who
may have an enemy may also have a
judge, a jury and an executioner. The
Courts decided that Morris could not
be convicted ; at all events, he was dis
charged from custody. He was arrested
for another offense (vagrancy), tried and
acquitted. He was arrested for still an
other offense (carrying 'concealed weap
ons), tried and convicted. When ab
duoted and killed he was serving out a
legal sentence imposed by a proper
tribunal, and his slayers have put them
selves in the attitude of murderers. We
hope the Governor will leave no stone
unturned to secure their detection.
NORTHERN IMMIGRATION.
The Mobile Register quotes from a
Northern exchange as follows concern
ing Northern immigration:
There cn be no doubt that they could ob
tain higher wages, live more cheaply, and find
their condition in every way better in North
Carolina or Georgia than in New York or New
England. If Southern capitalists, who are
anxious to obtain Northern labor, would be at
the pains to visit the manufacturing districts
of the North in person, and present the facts
themselves in an intelligible way to Northern
artisans, they would have little difficulty in se
curing an abundance of competent and intelli
gent manufacturing labor.
We give our hearty endorsement to
the above. The prime necessity of
the South is immigration. At
present the outlook for assistance from
Europe is discouraging in the extreme.
The hard times that have followed the
panic have caused European immigra
tion to fall off fully fifty per cent. The
very same cause has produced an en
tirely different effect in the Northern and
Eastern States. There the low price of
labor and the scarcity of labor have
combined to bring about much suffering
among the poorer classes, and they are,
as a consequence, anxious to better
their condition. Many thousands of
of them would come to Georgia if they
believed that such a move would im
prove their condition—if they had the
advantages of our soil and climate pre
sented to them. We do not wish pau
per immigration. We do not desire
those to come who will have to be sup
ported after their arrival. But we do
need the mechanics, steady, sober and
industrious mechanics, and laborers of
New England and the Middle States
who will come here with a determina
tion to work_ and to build up the coun
try. We want immigrants who can rent
or purchase five, ten, twenty, fifty or a
hundred acres of land, and put their
farms, no matter what the size, in a
thorough state of cultivation. Such immi
grants will make money and prosper,
and be of # incalculable benefit to their
adopted State. vYe have plenty of land,
a delightful climate, an extensive rail
way system, inexhaustible water power,
rich mineral deposits and a generous and
hospitable people. What we most need
is population, for population will bring
wealth, commeroe and manufactures in
its train. If we oould be put in free
communication with the densely popu
lated States of the North and East we
are confident that much could be ac
complished—at least ten thousand set
tlers could be induced to come to Geor
gia before next November. The game
is well worth the candle, and we hope
to see intelligent action before long.
A feeble effort to repeat the Gbeeley
movement of 1872 is being made in New
York. A oall has been issued for a con
ference, to be held in that city on May
15, to consider what may be done to se
cure the election of men in the national
election to the highest offioes of the re
public whose character and ability will
satisfy the exigencies of the present sit
uation, protect the honor of the Ameri
can name, prevent the national election
of the Centennial year from beooming
the mere choice of evils, and satisfy the
popular desire for genuine reform. The
call is signed by Wm. Cullen Bryant,
Theo. D. Woolsey, Alex, H. Bulloch,
Horace White and Cabl Schdbz. If
Messrs. Bryant, Bulloch & Cos. oan
contain their souls in patience until the
National Democratic Convention assem
bles in St. Louis they will be given can
didates and a platform that every hon
est Republican can conscientiously sup
port.
Governor Smith’s withdrawal has
been a GoD-send to all the aspirants for
gubernatorial honors. Each candidate
has been greatly strengthened and will
be “rallied upon” by the friends of
Smith to a truly alarming extent. The
Athens Georgian says : “It is well known
that Gen. Colquitt contributed much
towards securing the nomination oi
Got. Smith in 1872, and it is equally
well known that the strong friends of
Gov. Smith are likewise friends and ad
mirers of Gen. Colquitt. Thus, with
that strength which he has undoubtedly
gained by Gov. Smith’s declining to be
a candidate for re-election, he already
so far distances all of his competitors
as to make it a foregone conclusion that
Gen. A. H. Colquitt, the true and noble
patriot, the gallant ex-Confederate sol
dier, will be the next Governor of Geor
gia.”
We hope now that the papers have
quite done with Mr. Geo. H. Pendle
ton and his railway fees. The'sensation
has been so effectually spoiled that even
Beast Butler and the Chicago Inter-
Ocean no longer consider it available
political capital. Mr. Elliott H Pen
dleton, a brother of the Ohio states
man, gave the corpse of the scandalous
story a last kick in his testimony Tues
day, He exhibited all the checks and
drafts connected with the fee, and prov
ed that not a dollar of the money had
been applied to improper uses. Mr.
Pendleton’s vindication has been fall
and oomplete, and the authors of the
story are the only sufferers by the sen
sation.
MR. BLAINE IN A BAD WAY.
The New York Sun says: “Asa can
didate for President, as a Representa
tive in Congress, and as a man, Mr.
Blaine is irretrievably rained, unless
he at once abandons the false position
he has taken in regard to the $64,000 ob
tained from the Union Pacific Railroad
Company, upon a deposit of $75,000 of
Little Rook and Fort Smith .bonds as
collateral at par, when they were not
worth twenty cents on the dollar.—
When urged by some of his friends to
demand an investigation, Mr. Blaine
gave as an excuse for not adopting this
advice, that the House was politically
prejudiced against him, and that the
charges would be kept hanging over his
head for injurious affect, until the close
of the session. These assumptions are
not only unfounded, bst they are miser
able pleas invented to avoid a plain
duty. No committee wonld dare to
pursue the course which Mr. Bovine
has imagined as a convenient refuge for
himself. He would be entitled to a
prompt hearing, even if other business
should have to be set aside. The char
acter of a member of the House is a
matter of privilege demanding priority,
as he well knows. Therefore, that pre
text for shunning investigation is worth
less. This artifice is qnite consistent
with that which proceeds it. Mr. Blaine
left Washington for a fortnight, in or
der to patch up the equivocal defense
which appeared simultaneously with the
charge against him in two letters from
Morton, Bliss & Cos., and E. H. Rol
lins. He took very good care to with
hold from the public his own inquiries
which he had addressed to those par
ties, which were technically framed so
as to clear him from charges that were
not made at all, and to have the appear
ance at the same time of covering the
real points in controversy.
This sort of trickery, which is one of
Mr. Blaine’s peculiar qualities, will not
satisfy the publio upon a question that
directly involves his personal integrity
and his conduct as a legislator. The
roundabout way in which * this money
was procured from the Union Pacifio,
upon a pledge of worthless bonds, is of
itself evidence of a purpose to conceal
the real beneficiary and to hide Mr.
Blaine’s head, while his pockets were
well lined with greenbacks in exchange
for his unsalable Arkansas scrip. Col.
Tom Scott, then President of the Union
Pacific, was the blind for this transac
tion, and the intimate relations between
Soott and Blaine whioh brought about
suoh ties, are well worthy of inquiry in
view of the legislative favors obtained
by Scott while Blaine was Speaker.
Whatever charge has been made
against Mr. Blaine comes from his own
side, and therefore cannot be imputed
to any political hostility. Mr. J. 0.
Harrison, of Indianapolis, is a leading
Republican and a responsible citizen,
whose statements cannot be whistled
down the wind by any pretentious de
nials by Mr. Blaine, artfully contrived
to evade the real issue. Mr. Harrison
is ready to testify to the facts under
oath, and swear that Mr. Rollins in
duced him to withdraw the proposition
for an inquiry as to this money, be
cause Mr. Blaine had received it and in
vestigation would defeat his re-election.
That is the starting point. The records
of the Executive Committee of the
Union Pacific will show the order to
pay Morton, Bliss & Cos. $64,000 on the
collateral of seventy-five land grant
bonds of the Little Rock and Fort
Smith Company, at SI,OOO each. Mor-
ton, Bliss & Cos. know to whom they
paid that money, and when Colonel
Tom Soott is called he cannot well
forget whether he loaned that
sum of money to Mr. Blaine or not.
The connecting links of this chain are
all Within ready reach. The Union Pa
cific is a large debtor to the Govern
ment, and the Judiciary Committee are
bound to inquire into the legality of a
proceeding by whioh the funds of the
company were diverted to personal uses
and for exceptional objects. That sub
ject is properly included under a pend
ing investigation. It cannot be touched
without involving the scandal with which
Mr. Blaine is mixed up. Any inquiry
must necessarily lead back to the facts
connected with the $150,000 of Little
Rock and Fort Smith bonds which came
into Mr. Blaine’s possession. Public
opinion demands a searching and thor
ough investigation into all this ugly
business, and since Mr. Blaine does not
value his character sufficiently, or is
afraid to ask it himself, the Judiciary
Committee owe that duty to the country
and to the House. When Mr. Bris
tow’s name was recently involved in a
case of far less importance, he did not
wait to be summoned, or stand upon the
order of his going. He asked for an
immediate hearing, as every innocent
man would do, and put himself ou trial,
not fearing chat a committee would keep
him suspended, or that political adver
saries wonld seek to do him injustice.
Mr. Blaine may look at that example
and find in it a crushing condemnation
of his own wily devices to avoid an in
vestigation.
THE GEORGIA RAILROAD.
We publish this morning in the
Chronicle and Sentinel a communica
tion signed “Clarke,’’reviewing the past
management of the Georgia Railroad,
and criticising with considerable severi
ty the administration of Judge King.
The writer displays great familiarity
with the history of the corporation, and
writes with ability as well as severity,
we puDltsn tils uumuiuuluuduu an we ilu
all respectful articles accompanied by
responsible names. We presume that
Judge King is able to take care of him
self, and in “Clarke”'he has found a
foeman worthy of his steel. In this
connection, we may state that the
chances of a contest next month for the
Presidency of the company are growing
small by degrees and beautifully less.
We understand that Mr. Phinizy will not
be a candidate, and that Judge King
will have a clear field. The attendance
of stockholders, however, promises to be
large, and there is some prospect of a
fight being made npon some of the pres
ent Directory.
Donn Piatt charges that President
Grant is drinking very hard. In the
last issue of the Capital he says : “It
is well known abont Washington that
Gen. Grant, vexed and worried over the
late developments, has resorted to his
old remedy for relief. In othee words,
he has been so nnder the influence of
intoxicating liquors as to be at times in
capable of seeing visitors or transacting
business. Upon last Sunday we drove
by the Asylum for Lunatics at the mo
ment when Gen. Grant came ont at the
gate and started to walk to the city.
There was no mistaking the flushed and
bloated face and unsteady gait. ”
Thb Griffin News says “there seems
to be a general impression that there are
parties in high places who are afraid
that Blodgett may make damaging dis
closures. Let ns have light.” We fear
the News will not be gratified. S*o long
as the slaves of the Box hasten to do his
bidding, Mr. Blodgett will not relin
quish his power over them by disclosing
his secrets. The Griffin New* may rest
satisfied that Blodgett will sever be
tried or punished. He is as saf£ behind
his Box as a Christian guarded! by four
aces.
SUPREME COURT DECISIONS
DECISIONS RENDERED APRIL 11, 1876.
[Atlanta Constitution.]
Thurman vs. Cherokee Railroad Com
pany. Case, from Bartow.
Warner, 0. J.
This was an action brought by the
plaintiff against the defendant to re
cover damages for personal injuries sus
tained by him as an employee whilst
the defendant’s road was in the hands
oif a receiver appointed by a Court of
Chancery. The defendant demurred to
the plaintiff’s declaration and made a
motion to dismiss it, which demurrer
and motion was sustained by the Court,
and the plaintiff excepted. This case
comes within the ruling of this Court in
Henderson vs. Walker, decided at the
last term (not vet reported) and is con
trolled by it. Let the judgment of the
Court below be affirmed.
Ataway vs. The State. Assault with
intent to murder, from Bartow.
Warner, C, J.
The defendant was indicted for the
offense of an assault with intent to mur
der, and on his trial therefor was found
guilty. A motion for anew trial was
made by the defendant, on the grounds
that the verdict was contrary to law and
the evidence, and for newly discovered
evidence since the trial, which motion
was overruled by the Court, and the
defendant excepted. The assault was
committed in the night, and the only
point made upon the evidence was as to
the identity of the defendant. The j ury
were satisfied from the evidence before
them that the defendant committed the
assault and cut the prosecutor with his
knife, as alleged in the indictment, and
in our judgment their was sufficient evi
dence, as disclosed by the record, to
sustain their verdict under the law. The
newly discovered evidence is not of that
character which would authorize any
Court to grant anew trial on that ground.
There was no error in overruling the
motion for anew trial. Let the judg
ment of the Court below be affirmed.
Smith, Governor, vs. Taylor, et al.
Debt, from Dade.
Warner, C. J.
This was an action brought by the
plaintiff for the use of the Ordinary of
Dade county, against the defendants, on
their bond executed by Taylor, the for
mer Ordinary of said county, and his se
curities, conditioned that if the said
Taylor should well and truly discharge
fill and singular the duties required of
him in virtue of his said office of Ordi
nary according to law, and the trust re
posed in him, then said obligation to be
void, else to remain in full force and
virlne. The breaoh of the bond, as al
leged in the plaintiff’s declaration, is
that the defendant, Taylßr, as Ordinary,
failed to perform his duty in this, that
one Wilkinson was elected tax collector
for the year 1870, 1871, and 1872, for
said county of Dade, and failed to give
any bond as required by law for securing
the taxes due the county, and that the
said Taylor, as Ordinary, well knowing
the fact that no such bond had been
given by said Wilkinson, permitted
him to proceed and collect the county
taxes for the aforesaid years, without
appointing any other competent person
to collect said county taxes, as he was
required by law to have done, whereby,
the county lost the taxes due to it for
the aforesaid years, amounting to more
than $2,000. The defendants demur
red to the plaintiff’s declaration, on the
ground that it did not make such a case
as would entitle the plaintiff to recover
on the bond sued on. The Court sus
tained the demurrer and dismissed the
plaintiff’s aotion. Whereupon the plain
tiff excepted. The only bond whioh the
Ordinary is required to give under stat
ute law of this State is a bond in the
sum of ond thousand dollars, for the
faithful discharge of his duty as Clerk
of the Ordinary—Code 321. Although
the bond now sued is not, according to
its terms, in strict conformity with the
statute, especially as to the condition
thereof, still, under the provisions of
the 167th section of the Code, it is not
void for that reason, but should be held
to stand in the place of just such a bond
as the statute required the Ordinary to
give. The 167th section declares that
“Whenever any officer required by law
to give any official bond acts under a
bond, which is not in the penalty, pay
able and conditioned, nor approved and
filed as prescribed by law, such bond is
not void, but stands in the place of the
official bond, subject on its condition
being broken to all the remedies, in
cluding the several recoveries which the
person aggrieved might have maintained
on the official bond.” It follows, there
fore, that inasmuch as the Ordinary is
only required to give a bond of SI,OOO
for the faithfnl discharge of his duty as
Clerk of the Ordinary, the bond now
sued on should be held to stand in the
place of such a bond, and the defendants
should be held liable thereon for any
breach of duty by the Ordinary, as the
Clerk thereof, in the same manner as if
that condition had been inserted in the
bond, and not otherwise. If the plain
tiff could be allowed to recover the full
penalty of the bond on account of the
alleged breach thereof as contained in
his declaration, there would be no rem
edy left for the protection of those who
may have been injured by the failure of
the* Ordinary to discharge his duty as
Clerk thereof, the persons for
whose protection the statute required
the bond to be given. We find no error
in sustaining the defendants’ demurrer
to the plaintiff’s declaration. Let the
judgment of the Court below be affirmed.
Bailey, et al. vs. The State. Burglary,
from Floyd.
BLECKLEY, J.
When six persons are indicted togeth
er for burglary, four as principals in the
first, and two as principals in the second
degree, and all the goods stolen on the
occasion of the burglary have been found
in possession of one of the four, and the
only witnesses who connect the other
three (those on trial) with the offense
are the two principals in the second de
gree, who avowed their own guilt and
who, though agreeing on all the proxi
mate facts, contradict each other in re
spect to several remote circumstances,
and two of the accused on trial prove an
alibi by one witness, and the third, be
sides being shown to be a person of
good character, establishes an alibi by
four witnesses, a verdict of guilty is con
trary to evidence, and anew trial should
be granted. Judgment reversed.
Edmondson vs. Leach. Claim, from
Murray.
Blhoeley, J.
1. An estate forfeited by breach of
condition subsequent is not reverted in
the grantor until after entry or action
brought by him or his heirs—2o Ga.
563. 2. Before such entry or action, the
land is not subject to levy and sale as
the grantor’s property, under judgment
later than the conveyance—B Blackford,
138. 3. In a claim case the plaintiff did
not show the property subject prima
facie, by producing a deed from the de
fendant dated prior to the judgment,
conveying to the trustees and their suc
cessors forever “in trust that they erect
and build a house or a place of worship
for the use of the members of the Me
thodist Episcopal Church South in the
United States of America,” and by
proving that the premises while under
the deed were built up and occupied as
a Methodist Church ground, and that
previous to the levy, and five years pre
vious to the trial, the Methodists of the
county concluded to discontinue the
use, removed some of the erections, left
the land vacant, appointed an agent to
sell it, and that it has remained vacant
ever since. The claimant was not one
of the trustees, and so far as appeared
did not represent the church or the
church members, or claim for their
benefit. Judgment affirmed.
Augustus H. Lee, executor, &c., vs. For
tune N. Chisholm, et. al. In equity,
from Newton.
Jackson, J.
L When this case was here before it
was ruled that the following items
testator’s will: “I loan to my wife dur
ing her natural life $5,000, also that my
executors purchase for my Wife a negro
woman or girl, such as she may select,
the same to be loaned to her her life
time, the same to be purchased out of
the proceeds of my property.” "It is_
my will and desires that at the death of
my wife the money loaned her and the
negro to be purchased by my executors
be sold and equally divided amongst all*
my children and my grand daughter,
Eldsenda Brown” * * *, created a
life estate in the wife with remainder to
the children and grand daughter, and
that “it was the duty of the executor so
to execute the will as to effect that in
tention by investing the money, paying
the widow the interest thereof during
her life, and at her death to divide it
equally among the children and grand
daughter, rb directed by testator’s wilL”
This ruling was in this ease and be
tween these parties, and aa far as it
goes is res adjudicala. 2. A decree in
favor of the widow against the exeontor
ou a bill brought by her and
answered by him in which he
sets up no defense in behali of the
remainder men, but admits that the cor
pus is due the widow under the will, and
defends solely on the ground that he has
not enough assets of the estate where
with to pay her, is no protection to the
executor against the claim of the re
mainder men for whatever corpus of this
estate came into his hands in available
assets. It was his duty to make these
remainder men parties by cross bill, or
his answer in the nature of a cross bill,
or at least to have defended the widow’s
snit by setting up tneir right in remain
der to the corpus, and having the will
contested and their rights adjudicated.
Much less will he be so protected when
his whole defense shows that he was en-
deavoring to protect his own private in
terest without the slightest regard to the
trust he had undertaken, and when on a
bill to open and review that decree in
favor of the widow, and to enjoin its
collection; he swore that he “made no
resistance and was not disposed to con
test any matters with her,” and again
that he supposed her bill “was simply
an effort on the part of the complainant
in said case to set np and establish her
claim to said legacies against the estate
of said Henderson, and this your orator
did not and does now pretend to resist,”
and when this whole bill of review and
for injunction, sworn to by him, shows
that it was filed solely to protect his own
private estate. 3. Any money paid by
the executor to the widow, whether vol
untarily or under a decree so obtained,
should have been the interest of this
estate, and no part of the corpus, in or
der to protect the exeoutor against the
remainder men ; and as the evidence is
sufficient to sustain the verdict of the
jury in finding the sum they did, as
available oorpus in his hands, we will
not control the discretion of the Oourt
below in refusing to grant anew trial.
Jndgment affirmed.
Valentine Zimmer vs. Wm. F. Dansby.
Claim, from Troup,
Jackson, J.
If the legal title to land be in the hus
band, and he holds the possession there
of under such title, and the title and
possession so remain until a creditor,
who gave oredit on the faith that the
property was the husband’s, without any
notice of the wife’s equity, reduces his
debt to judgment, the lien of such judg
ment will bind the land and will be en
forced against a secret equity of the
wife, resulting from the fact that her
money paid for the land. Jndgment re
versed.
John Braggs vs. Mary E. Underwood.
In equity, from Troup.
Jaokson, J.
An agreement was entered into by
husband and wife whereby to settle un
fortunate difficulties between them. It
was agreed that they should mutually
occupy and enjoy a certain honse and
lot, with certain limitations over in case
of death. Subsequently the wife sued
the husband for divorce, which was
granted, with liberty to each to marry
again. Pending the divorce, counsel
agreed that the question of property
should be left open without prejudioe to
either party. The wife, having failed by
writ of partition to divide the property,
brought her bill in equity and alleged
that the husband was in the sole occu
pancy and use of the house, and had en
joyed all the rents thereof since the di
vorce, was insolvent and unable to re
spond to her in damages, and prayed for
au injunction, and the appointment of a
receiver to take charge of the property,
and hold the future rents subject to the
order of the Court. The Oourt granted
the prayer, and directed the receiver to
pay half the rents iu future to the hus
band, and retain the other half to wait
the final decree. Held, that there is
equity in the bill, and that the Court
did right in appointing a receiver to
take obarge of the property, and to pre
serve the future rents to await the final
decree. Judgment affirmed.
Jones vs. Junes, administrator. Injunc
tion, from Polk.
Bleckley, J.
On land conveyed in 1870, the vendor,
or one holding the notes given for the
purchase money, has no lien for pay
ment; nor, after death of the vendee,
has suoh creditor any priority of pay
ment, out of the. land or its prooeeds
over other creditors by promissory
notes, Ac. Judgment affirmed.
Elizabeth M. Sloan vs. George J. Bri
ant. Case, from Bartow.
Jaokson, J.
An action brought by a woman
against a married man to reeover money
under a contract made before cohabita
tion to pay her SI,OOO, and give her a
house and lot in ease of the birth of a
child, though repeated and ratified of
ten after the birth of the child, is a suit
instituted in oonsequenee of adultery,
and in suoh a suit the woman is incom
petent to testify—Code 3855. Judg
ment affirmed.
IMPORTANT DECISION RENDERED
TUESDAY.
[Atlanta Constitution.] /
Carter vs. Cotton States’ Life Insuranoe
Company. Complaint, from Rich
mond.
Wabnbb, C. J.
This was an action brought on a poli
cy of life insuranoe for $5,000, issued by
defendant payable to plaintiff, on the
life of her husband, Dr. Flournoy Car
ter. The policy was dated November
25, 1872, and was delivered to Dr. Car
ter. Dr. Carter died of pneumonia July
18bh, 1873. Notice of .death to defend
ant was shown, and its sufficiency not
objected to. The refusal of the company
to pay was based on the fact that Dr.
Carter had never paid the first cash pre
mium, or given any note for the portion
of the first yearV premium, which was
to be a loan. The case of the plaintiff
was, that by an agreement with M. W.
Abney, the company’s agent who took
the risk and delivered the policy to Dr.
Garter, the premium for the first year
was to be paid by services to be render
ed the company, as medical examiner in
Augusta, and that Dr. Garter did render
suoh services whenever called on, until
prevented by death. The clauses of the
policy essential to. be stated are as fol
lows : “The Cotton States Life Insur
anoe Company, in consideration of the
representations for this policy, signed
by Flournoy Carter, and dated November
8, 1872, and nnmbered as this policy,
and an annual premium of two hundred
aud seven dollars and thirty cents, to be
paid on or before the 25th day of No
vember in each and every year from the
date of aud during the continuance of
this policy; which annnal premium is to
be paid in the manner following : an
annnal loan of one hundred dollars, and
a cash annual premium of one hundred
and seven dollars and thirty cents, .tP be
paid on the 25th day of November, clo
assure,” Ac., (and agree to pay) the
“said sum insured (the balance of the
year’s premiums on this policy, if any,
and also all notes or credits for pre
miums thereon and other indebtedness
of insured to this company being first
deducted.”)
Conditioned to be void—lst. *lf the
premiums due on this policy shall not
be paid at the times above mentioned,
and the interest on all notes or credits
for premiums on this policy paid an
nually in advance to this company, or
its authorized agents.” The following
is the essential part of the “applica
tion” of the insured referred to in the
policy : “It is declared * * * that the
policy of insurance hereby applied for
shall not be binding on this company
until the first premium, as stated there
in, shall have been received by said
company, or some authorized agent
thereof, during the lifetime and good
health of the person therein insured,
and inasmuch as only the officers at the
home office of thh company in the city
of Macon, Ga., have authority to deter
mine whether or not a policy shall issue
on any application, and they act on the
written statements and representations
referred to, it is expressly understood
and agreed that no statements, repre
sentations or information made or given
to the person soliciting or taking this
application for a policy shall be binding
on the company, or in any manner affect
its rights, unless such statements, rep
resentations or information be reduced
to writing and presented to the officers
of the company at the home office in the
application above.”
On the back of the application was
the following entry, unsigned—Agents
memorandum, premium and statement:
Table premi am.l
Less—loan 12 months’ note.... 100 00
Balance $lO7 30
*2 A TEAR—POSTAGE PAID.
Policy fee and stamp.. i 00
First cash payment.'., SIOB 30
It was proved, on the part of the
plaintiff, that Abney was the agent of
the defendant for taking risks m Augus
ta; that the agreement above stated was
made between him and Dr. Carter; and
that Dr. Carter did, in pursuance of the
agreement, examine a number of appli
cants for insurance; also that Dr. Ford,
after Dr. Carter was taken sick, examiu
ed several fbr him and for his benefit.
The fee for these examinations, how
ever, did not amount to the first year’s
premium. There was a variance be
tween witnesses as to one point of this
agreement. The plaintiff, stating that
her husband had told her, oonfirmed by
what Abney had told her, said that the
year’s services were to go against the
year s premium, without regard to their
amount. A witness named Howard, exam
ined by interrogatories at plaintiff’s in
stance, whioh were introduced by de-
fendant, said it was this: that if the
services in a year exceed the premium,
he was to be credited for the excess on
next year’s premium, and that nothing
was said of the contingency of a defi
ciency. The same witness' stated that
after the policy, was delivered, Abney
asked Carter to give a due bill for the
difference between the first year’s cash
premium and the services already ren
dered, which Carter refused, saying he
meant to hold him to his bargain, upon
which Abney Said he would make it all
right. Howard also testified that in the
Spring of 1873, Carter came to him in
an excited manner and showed him a
letter from Mr. Obear, which was a
dun for the premium. He said witness
knew his agreement with Abney, that he
was to pay the premium in servioes, and
now they were dunning him and had not
even given him credit for the servioes
performed. Witness took the letter and
showed it to Abney, who said he was
nbout to send in his report, which would
make it all right, and sent a message to
Carter (whioh witness delivered) to pay
no attention to the letter. The oustom
of the local agents was, opt of SIOO pre
mium to keep for their oommissious,
to pay five to the medical examinre and
send $75 to Abney. In the cases when
Dr. Carter examined, they kept S2Q for
themselves and sent SBO to Abney. This
witness, Howard, waH a sub-agent under
Abney, and had brought Abney and
Carter together to make the agreement
referred to. Abney lived in Edgefield,
S. C.; aad had sub-agenta in Augusta.
Geo. S. Obear, the Secretary of de
fendant, testified that Abney was the
company’B agent for South Carolina, with
the right to go into any territory; that
he had the same powers as the other
agents, whioh were to receive applica
tions and forward them to the home of
fice; if approved, to deliver the policies
and receive the premiums; that he had
no other powers; that he had no authori
ty to make such a contract aa the one
set up by the plaintiff; that no oustom of
this company, or any other, so far as
witness knows, authorized agents to re
ceive anything but money for pre
miums. The witness Obear said that no
information as to this alleged agree
ment was received by the home office
until after Dr. Carter’s death. It was
the. custom of the company, when a
policy was issued and sent to tho agent,
if the return of the premium was not
made at the proper time, to write to the
person insured and notify him, and if
fie did not pay, to notify him that the
policy was avoided. The paper, of
which the following is a oopy, was pro
duced by the plaintiff under notice, with
the statement that it was received dur
ing Dr. Carter’s extreme illness, and
for that reason was never shown to him:
“ Maoon, Ga., June 17,1873.
Mr. Flournoy Carter : Please fill up
the blank spaces below, referring to
your policy in this company, and return
and oblige. If payment has not been
made, please state that fact.
Geo. S. Obear, Secretary.
No. 1 Prem | Int | Dae [ To whom pd rWfieiTpd
“Policy holders are requested to pay
promptly on the day premiums become
due. When it is not convenient to pay
to authorized agents, payment may be
made direot to the company by check or
draft, by post offioe order or by express. ”
This was the form of the one sent in
April, 1873, referred to by Howard. De
fendant also read a letter dated July 18,
1873, to Dr. Carter, notifying him that
his policy was void. This letter was not
received till after Dr. Carter’s death.
The Court refused to charge, as re
quested in writing by plaintiffs oounsel,
“that if. the agent of the company
agreed with Dr. Carter that the premium
should be paid ill medioal services as
examiner, and Carter agreed to render
such services in consideration of the
policy, and Carter did render snob ser
vioes when called on, until hindered by
sickness and death, the policy is bind
ing on the defendant.” The Court did
charge, at request of defendant, as fol
lows : 1. An agent of an insurance com
pany, whose agency extends only to pro
curing applications, forwarding them to
the parent offioe, countersigning and de
livering policies, and receiving premi
ums, has no authority to make a con
tract of insurance or to modify the
terms of a policy. 2. A recital in the
application for insuranoe (said ap
plication being signed by the in
sured) in the words following, to
wit: “Apd inasmuch as only the offi
cers at the home office ip Macon have
authority to * determine whether the
policy shall issue to any application,”
is notice to the applicant that suoh an
agent as the above described has no
power to make or modify a contract.
3. An agent appointed to solicit and
forward to the home office applications
for insurance; to receive from the home
office the policies of insurance, and to
countersign them, and to receive the
preminms which by the policy are re
quired to be in cash, whilst he may
waive the cash payment, his deliver
ing of the policy without suoh pay
ment, and without the executian and
delivery of the note on account of first
premium, would not by itself bind the
oompany. Still less has such an agent
authority to make a different contract
as to the mode of payment of the pre
mium, aud a contract for a premium
different in kiDd and amount. 4
A contract to receive medical services
in lieu of a cash premium without
eference to their value in the aggre
gate, and with no provision for pay
ment of the difference between the value
of such services and the amount of the
premium is not merely a waiver of pay
ment of a stipulated sum in cash but is
a contract for a different kind, and
amount of premium. Such a contract
exceeds the powers of such an agent. 5.
If, in the agreement made by Dr. Car
ter with Abney, the former looked to
Abney individually, the plaintiff can not
recover of the company. 6. The policy
of insurance, and the application of the
insured are to be construed together as
one contract, and if in the application
there is a provision that the policy shall
not be binding on the company nntil the
first premium shall have been received,
such provision in the application is a
part of the policy. 7. If there was an
agreement between Dr. Carter and Ab
ney, defendant’s agent,., that the pre
mium should be paid in medical ser
vices, as examiner for defondant, such
agreement only bound Abney individu
ally, and was not binding on the com
any. 8. That if the jury believe from
the testimony that no note was given by
Carter for the loan part of the premium,
the policy did not take effect and was
not binding on defendant.
Under this charge the jury found for
defendant, and plaintiff excepted and
assigns the same as error. The main
controlling question in this case, in view
of the foregoing statement of facts, is
whether the defendant was bound by the
aots of its agent, Abney, in making the
the contract for insurance which the
plaintiff now seeks to enforce against it.
The question is not whether the policy
would be binding on the defendant if
its agent had given to the insured credit
for the payment of the first premium to
be paid to obtain the policy, but the
question is whether its agent had the
authority to bind the defendant by the
contract which he did make with the in
sured, that the premium due on thepoli
cv for the first year was to be paid by
the insured by services to be rendered
to the defendant as medical examiner
in Augusta; that if his services in a year
exceeded the first year’s premium, he
was to be credited for the excess on
the next years’ premium. This is sub
stantially the contract which Carter
the insured, made with Abney, the de
fendant’s agent, to obtain the policy
now sued on. The general rule is that
the principal is only bonnd by the aots
of his agent, when the latter acts within
the. scope of his authority. To establish
the liability of the defendant for the
payment of the policy now sued on, the
Case bf Miller vs. Life Insurance Com
pany (12 th Wallace’s Report 285) was
cited on the argument by the plaintiff in
error. The point decided by the Court
in that case was, that where an insur-
anoe company instructed its agents not
to deliver policies until the whole pre
miums are paid “as the same will stand
charged to their account until the pre
miums are received” and the agent did,
nevertheles, deliver a policy giving a
credit to the insurer and waiving
a cash payment that the com
pany, it being a stock com
pany was bound for the payment of the
polioy. The question in that case, was
whether the defendant’s general agent,
under his instructions, could waive the
present payment of a cash premium
prior to the issuing of the policy so as
to find the company. The question in
the case now before us, is not whether
the defendant’s agent could have waiv
ed the immediate or present cash pay
ment of the first premium for a short
time, when he issued the polioy to the
insured, so as to find the defendant’s
company, but the question here is,
whether the defendant’s agent had the
authority to make the contract he did
with the insured, that the first premium
should be paid in services to be render
ed as a medical examiner for the defen
dant as shown by the evidence in the
record, so as to bind the defendant’s
company for the payment of the policy ?
This precise question was deoided in
the case of the Anchor Life Insurance
Cos. va. Pease, reported in Bigelow’s
Life and Aooident Insurance Reports
4th vol. 215. Although it does not ap-
pear from the report of that ease that
the contraot made with the insured that
the premium to be paid in services as
examining physioian, was the first pre
mium due on the polioy, still the prin
ciple reoognized and deoided by the
Court is that oase in respect to the au
thority of the agent to make such a con
tract, is as applicable to the ftrst as sub
sequent premiums. The decision of the
Court m the ease last cited, appears to
be based on sound legal principles as
enunciated therein, and for that reason
we adopt them as being applicable to
the ease before us, in rendering our
judgment, The contraot made by the
insured with the defendant’s agent was
of an extraordinary character, not shown
to have been customary, or within the
scope of the powers of such agents, but
on the oontrary, the uncontroverted evi
deuoe in the reoord is, that the agent
had no authority to make such a con
tract; besides, it would seem from the
evidenoe that the insured must have
been aware of that fact when he appeal
ed to the agent, instead of the company,
when the latter demanded the payment
of the premium from him, and also
when the agent demanded his due bill
for the difference between the first
years oash premium and the services
then rendered, the insured said he
meant to hold him, the agent, to his
bargain, and refused to give his note.
The payment of premiums in cash by
the insured iu a life insurance company,
is an important element in conducting
the business of such companies, and if
the agents thereof shall be allowed to
oontraot with the insured for the pay
ment of premiums in medical services
to be rendered the company, why not be
allowed to contraot for the payment of
premiums in horses and buggies for tbe
agents to travel over the country to pro
cure insurance for the benefit of the com
pany ? The only safe rule is to adhere
to the well established principles of the
law in all cases when they can be ascer
tained, though it has been said that hard
cases make shipwreck of the law, and
that remark is probably quite as appli
cable to the law governing life insurance
contracts as any other. In the view
whioh we have taken of the contract
sned on in this oase under the evidence,
and the law applicable thereto, the
plaintiff was not entitled to recover, and
although we think the Court did err in
some of its charges to the jury, still the
charge of Court being right on the main
controlling question in the case, the
errors in relation to the other matters
complained of are immaterial. Let the
judgment of the Court below be affirmed.
Wm. H. Hull for plaintiff in error.
Barnes & Cumming, for defendant.
FIUHTING EDITORS.
Another Gloom Cant Over a Texas Commu
nity.
[Jefferson ( Terns) Letter , in Dallas Herald.]
An unfortunate controversy begun
several weeks ago between W. Y. Lead
er, of the Leader newspaper, and J.
Castleberry, proprietor of the Georgia
House, culminated this morning in the
death of Frank J. Patillo, late of the
Leader.
The facts in the case are briefly as fol
lows : The Leader published an item
reflecting upon the management of the
Georgia House, which was responded to
by Mr. Castleberry in an effusion of
rhyme. In reply to the latter produc
tion, Mr. Patillo published an excellent
parody on Poe’s “Raven,” wherein he
made most effective use of that terrible
weapon—ridicule. Mr. Castleberry re
plied in a card which exhibited more
temper than argument, which was re
plied to by Mr. Patillo in the following
Card.
The humorous poetry which has been
appearing in the Daily Leader nndei
the nom de plume of the “Printer’s
Devil,” in reference to the “Landlord of
the George-I House,” was written by
me in a spirit of pleasantry, in response
to his effusion. Hearing that Mr. Castle
berry was offended at me on account of
it, I went to him on Saturday and as
sured him that I had no intention of
wounding his feelings or injuring him
in any way, and that I thought it best
to drop it. He would not consent to do
so; bat insisted that he was not mad,
and that he would not take fifty dollars
for bis part. It is due to my self-re
spect to say to the public that in antici
pation of his last effort, and before see
ing it, I prepared and had put in type
what appears as a reply, under the head
of “Snipe and Noodles,” the couplet
from the “Landlord” at the head of the
article being inserted afterwards. I say
it is due to my self-respect to say this
much, for if I had anticipated or known
the character of his composition, de
cency would not have permitted me to
reply to it. In every line that I have
written I have scrupulously avoided in
decency and scurrility. Now in regard
to the article of “Landlord,” devoted
principally, to myself, in the Jimple
cute of Tuesday evening, I have this to
say : That I feel no resentment against
the insane author, for everybody re
gards him as non compos mentis to suoh
a degree as to hardly be responsible for
his actions. But in conclusion, I will
add, that nobody but an infamous aud
constitutional blackguard and a cowardly
pnppy like Ward Taylor, Jr., would ad
mit such scurrility and blackguardism
in the columns of a newspaper under
his control, and if he attemps to reply
to this declaration through his filthy
sheet, it will simply be a public con
firmation of his cowardice.
F. J. Patillo.
Jefferson, April 5, 1876.
Mr. Taylor replied to this phillippic
by sending a note to Mr. Patillo, through
the hands of Mr. George W. Watson, de
manding a retraction of the offensive
language or satisfaction in some other
way, which was answered by Mr. Patillo
on the following day with the subjoined
card:
Jefferson, Texas, April 7, 1876.
Ward Taylor, Jr.:
Your note of yesterday, by the hand
of Mr. George W. Watson, received,
from, which I infer that you are not
pleased with my card published in the
Daily Leader, of yesterday morning.
You demand that I shall at once make a
retraction. That is what lam not in the
habit of doing, and I don’t know how to
do. Then you want satisfaction in some
other way. Assess and collect your own
damages like a miller takes toll—with
out inviting his oustomers to the mea
suring. You request the appointm ant
of friends to arrange the preliminaries
of a meeting. By preliminaries I sup
pose you mean a safe distance between
two angry fools. I have no friends that
understand such surveying, nor do I ap
prehend that my safety demands such
protection. I must, therefore, decline
all your demands and requests.
F. J. Patillo.
In the Ji r.plecute, of the 7th, Mr.
Taylor published his note, and com
mented in severe terms upon Mr. Patil
to, charging that he had insulted and
attempted to injure his character, yet
had not the manhood to grans him that
satisfaction that a gentleman should al
ways be willing to accord. This morn
ing Mr. Patillo armed himself with a
cowhide, and meeting Mr. Taylor At
tempted to strike him, when Taylor
drew a pistol and shot him through the
heart.
The affair has cast a gloom over the
entire community, as both parties-to the
sad affair were well known and almost
universally respected. The deceased
was for several years a minister in the
Methodist Church, having at one time
had charge of a congregation in this
city. Mr. Taylor promptly surrendered
himself to the authorities, and is now in
custody.
