Funding for the digitization of this title was provided by R.J. Taylor, Jr. Foundation.
About Weekly chronicle & sentinel. (Augusta, Ga.) 1866-1877 | View Entire Issue (April 26, 1876)
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.
