Newspaper Page Text
Ctltonttie ana ,gntfnul.
Sattoul Dcr*Uc Ticket.
FOB PRESIDENT:
Samuel J. Tilden,
OF NEW YORK. , Jig
FOB VICE-PRESIDENT:
THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, •
OF INDIANA.
State Deaecratlc Ticket.
FOB GOVERNOR:
Alfred 11. Colquitt.
FOX CONLRK-iN—KIUHTH DISTRICT.*
ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS.
Far Rente, Bicbterath Beaaierial Dtatrlet,
Hoa. JVO. T. HHKW.WAKB, ef BMbmA
Far the
Jab. C. C. Buck, Patrick Walsh, W.
EwiSO J JHNBTON.
PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS.
Far the State at Larae.
A. R. LAWTON.
JOHN W. WOFFORD.
ALTERNATES,
L. J. OARTRELL,
H. D. D. TWIGGS.
Oiatrirt Elector*.
First Distriot-A. M. Rogers, of
Burke. Alternate, T. E. Davenport, of
°Second Distriot-R. E. Kennon, of
Clay. Alternate, James L. Seward, of
Thomas. „ _ _ ...
Third District—J. M. DnPree, of Ma
eon. Alternate, W. H. Harriaon, of
Stewart.
Fourth District—W. O. Toggle, of
Tronp. Alternate, E. M. Butt, of Ma
n°pifth District—F. D. Dismnke, of
Spalding. Alternate, W. A. Shorter, of
Falton. . _ . .
Sixth District—Frank Chambers, of
Wilkinson. Alternate, M. V. McKib
ben, of Butts. „ .
Seventh District—L. N. Trammell, of
Wimfleld. Alternate, Hamilton Yancey,
of Floyd. _ .
Eighth District — D. M. Dnßose, of
Wilkes. Alternate, F. E. Eve, of Co
lombia. , _ „
Ninth District—J. N. Dorsw, of Hall.
Alternate, F. L. Harison, of White.
CoMKHIMiI N.mlnations.
Firat Distriot—Julian Hartridoe.
Second District—William E. Smith.
Third District— Philip < ook.
Fourth District— Henry R Harris.
Fifth District—Milton A. Candler.
Sixth District—James H. Blount.
Seventh District—William H. Dab
net _ _
Eighth District—Alexander H. Sie-
PH Nfnt.li District— Benjamin H Hill.
WEDNESDAY.SEPTEMBER 27, 1876
Outrages in Alabama have increased
in number and brutality since the Dem
ocrats carried the State election. A
colored man named 11 Mobile Bill
gave the colored Congressman, Jkbe
Haralson, a licking in broad day light
last Monday.
Some of the State papers are de
aonneiug in a fearful way W. P. Price
as the Republican nominee for Congress
in the Third District, The abuse should
bo switched off to W. P. Pierce. W.
P. Price is a Democrat, living in Dah
ionega, who has served one term in Con
gress, and who is .perfeotly willing to
serve another.
We publish this morning a letter front
Hon. Alex. H. Stephens accepting the
Democratic nomination so flatteringly
tendered him by the Thomson Conven
tion. We are gratified to learn through
a private letter from Mr. Stephens that
the health of thedistingnished Georgian
ia rapidly improving. We think it
almost certain that he will be able to
take his seat in December.
Mr. Stephens’ last letter to Mr.
Thublow Weed will be read with in
terest. The discussion is important to
all who desire that the trnth of history
shall bo maintained. Mr. Weed’s
loose statements have gotten him into a
difficulty from whioh he will fiDd it im
possible to extricate himself. He will
doubtless be more careful in the future
bow he assails a man like Mr. Stephens,
who is always extremely careful about
his facts.
Babcock and the other safe burglary
conspirators are now on trial in Wash
ington City, bat even the correspond
ent of the Cincinnati Gazette thinks a
jury has been paoked to acquit. Three
of the jurors hold intimate relations
with the Distriot Ring and some of
them are now in the employment of
Babcock. Shepherd has natnrally es
poused the cause of the acoused and the
Boss is present at the trial giving aid
and comfort to his ally. We shall not
be at all surprised if the faroe at St.
Lonia is repeated and the defendant
promptly acquitted.
Gknebal Wade Hampton. Democratic candi
date for Governor of South Ca olina. is of me
dinm height and size, with a large head and
Burnside whiskers, and looks like a New York
dry goods merchant. He is a poor speaker.
He was Lieutenant-General of Confederate
•avail y.— A\ Y. Herald.
D. H. Chamberlain, Republican can
didate for Governor of South Carolina,
is a bald-headed, oily-tongned carpet
bagger, who looks like the “ fence ” of a
Land of pick-pookets. He ia one of the
most accomplished scamps in the Re
publican party South.
gacRKTART Chandler has decided to make at
least an attempt to prevent outrage at political
meetings in the South, by sendii g down as
speakers men of dignity and prominence, who
he expects will prevent any hostile demon*trA
tioa by their presenoe. He has five Union Ma
jor-Generals already on the list, namely. Banks,
Garfield. Lew Wallace, Stewaet L. Wood
ford and Kilpatrick.— Washington Special
Mr. Ch \nc lkb needn’t be afraid of
any ontrsges. His speakers may be
scalped on the stump (figuratively), but
will receive no bodily harm. Let the
*• Udion brigade ” oome along. Lamar
will attend to them in Missiaaippi; Ben
Hill, and Smith, and Gordon and Col
sjcrrx, and Stephens, and Hartridoe in
Georgia; Hampton and Butler and
Gary and McGowan in South Carolina ;
and Zeb. Vance in North Carolina.
When G jbFIELd speaks at a place where
there is no Democratic orator to answer
him some school boy will read Jkrbt
Black’s letter in reply.
The New York Herald oontisaes to
display its nsnal stupidity about South
ern affairs. In a recent issue it speaks
of Elliott as the Republican candidate
for Governor, and gives some other
■startling statements, as follows :
.Soiith Carolina politics are very much mixed,
lb lie publicans talk of withdrawing Elliott,
their caudidsie for Governor, on account of
his unpopularity, and the Democrats have de
ck'd to withdraw their electoral ticket and
fo. Congress in order to defeat At
torney-General Taft's order respecting the use
of United states troops to protect the ballot
box. This may be a compromise among some
of the party leaders on both sides to escape
the disgrace of EliaowVi election by con
centrating upon Samp ion ; but, whether this
is the
to Tildes'* zealous supporters.
As tue Herald published an article a
few days sinoe declaring that the nomi
nation of Chambkblain for Governor
made Soath Carolina “ inevitable for
Bate,,” it is a little singular that it
gjtould drop the Reformer so summarily
.nd ont Elliott in his place. If there
ia a runfor that the Democrats intend to
their electoral ticket it is a ru
mor that circulates only in the streets of
New York. It has not been, and will
not be, been! in South Carolina. The
Republicans, on their side, have no
mom idea of “ withdrawing ’’ Elliott
or any of the other scamps on their
ticket thaw they Lave of taking their
finger, oat of the publk treasury.
There will be ao compromises made.
The honest insu ia the Republican par
ty, white and colored,will quit it, in this
campaign at least, and vote fbr Hour
ton ard Tildes. The scamp# wiU fight
for Of*wwt.aiw aad Hates and " tour
yean more of gooi stealing.
A CAMFAHiX LIE NAILED.
Some days since the Cincinnati Ga
zette, a leading Republican paper of the
West, put at the head of its editorial
colnmns, tor the purpose of showing
the spirit the white people of
nth* what purported to be an tx-
HiHMMpplm campaign speech made by
J Getaeral M. W. Gary, at Aiken, South
Carolina. It was sent from Washing!oo
City to the Gazette as a " specimen
speech of the negro and Union-haters
of the South,” and read as follows :
WIN OR KfLL—TILDEN’ft SOUTHERN
TAI'TICH PUBLICLY ANNOUNCED.
Wpeeeti •fH. W.Oary la **e*lh Crella-“ir
Nuww W•■* Tete Yew Ticket, Sfcoe*
Them Dewn “ Certain -Wen Yon Mint
Mill-**
[.Special Dispatch to the Cincinnati Gazette.]
Washington, September 11.—A verbatim ae
count of a speech made by M. W. Gart, one of
Teldkn's leaders, at Aiken, S C., has been re
ceived here. It is said to be a specimen
speech of the negro and Union-haters of the
South. The following is an extract from the
speech as received here:
•Mr Friends -I tell you there are certain
men you must put out of the way: men yon
mast kill. These men are Chamberlain,
Elliott, Lee. Spar nice and others. They
must be killed fjr they are the leaders of the
negroes, and if you get rid of them we can
carry things as we want them. United States
troops have been sent down here to cany the
election for the Badicals, but we don't fear
them, do we ? [Cries of “no, no.”l We met
them on the field once, and we are ready to
meet < hem again. [Cries —“Yes, we are,” and
applause.] And now, let me tell yon what to
do on election day. Go in masses, armed, and
try and force the negroes to vote our ticket.
If they don't do it, shoot them down and cut
off their ears, and I warrant you this will teach
them a lesson; and even if we are not elected,
we will go to Columbia in foroe, and if not al
lowed to take our seats, we will surround the
rttate House and tear it down, and show them
we will rule. What say you, men; can’t we do
it ?” [Loud cries of “Yes. d—n it, yes.”]
Satisfied that General Gaby never
need any snch language as that attribu
ted to him by Chamberlain’s pimps, bnt
wishing to make an anthoritative denial,
we wrote to General Gaby, enclosing
the paragraph quoted above, and asking
if he ever made any such speech. The
following is his reply :
To the Hditors of the Chronicle and Sentinel:
Gentlemen—l have just rec-ive l the sli
cut fr .m the Cincinnati Gazette , which yon
were thoughtful enough to enclose to me,
which reads as follows:
****
The speech r ferred to was au extemporane
ous one, aid was delivered in the same Une of
argument and spirit as the ones I made at An
derson. Richland, Abbeville and Edgefield. Th
following is my recollection of the portion that
has been so grossly misrepresented: That in
the event of a c dlision between the Rad cals
and Democrats. I was opposed to shooting
down the poor ign'rant negro masses; that
they were the dopes of the Radical leaders,
aud that I for one ou such an occasion should
shoot first Chamberlain, Elliott, Patter
s >N, aud other suchcorr 'pt carpet bag leaders,
secon I, the miserable white scalawags; and
lastly, the black leaders. I was unwilling to
hurt a hair upon < he head of the negro masses.
Iu speaking of the “Hamburg riot,” I said I
believed Chamberlain Elliott. Lee. Spab
nicr, Louis Hchiller and Bam Spencer, all of
whom live in Aiken county, except ChaMbkr
i,ain, were the man who plotted and brought
ar>oat the fatal riot for political effect, and that
the evidence that had been addnoed proved
that such was the fact; and the failure txlay
or the Attorney-General to appear and the
Solicitor to give nut bills against the parties
charged was conclusive of their complicity in
this great tragedy.
Iu regard to the United 8-ates troo-s, I
stated that two companies bad been sent to
Edgefl Id, in violation of the Constitution and
tue judgment of the Supreme Court of the
United States, to intimidate our Democratic
voteys; that their presence did not give us any
concern; vp had met them In time of war on
thd battle field, apd were net frightened by
them, an*** tbit we could not be intimidated by
tbeir presence ’if time of profound peace -
That they were here in o!**dlen@B f® their or
ders, and that those that I hail 2*®t at Edge
field and iu the Btate were accomplished
men and educated soldiers, who would not, in
my opinion, degrade the high and honorable
position of an officer of the United Statss army
to become a detective or a police offioer at the
polls, in order to carry an election either for
the Radicals or Democrats.
I also told them if the Radioala went armed
to the election precincts to go aimed also, and
if the Radicals attempted to force the Demo
crats from the ballot box as they had done on
previous elections, to use sufficient force to
remove them out of the way, and if it became
necessary in order to remove them to shoo'
to do so, rather than be prevented from cast
ing their votes for Tilden and Hendricks and
for Hampton and Simpson.
I al-o advised them if our candidates were
fairly elected, not to permit the Slate canvas
sers of the Radical party to count th'm out,
but to go to Columbia when the Legislature
meets and to take their seats at all hazards.
Your obedient servant, M. W. Gary.
It will be seen from the above what a
baseless slander is contained in this
special dispatch to the Cincinnati Ga~
zette. It was invented by Chamberlain’s
tools in South Carolina, forwarded to
“Honest John” J. Patte son at Wash
ington, and disseminated by that scamp,
who has a position on the National Re
publican Committee. General Gaby
nails the lie promptly and emphatically.
Ho not only did not make use of the lan
guage attributed to him at Aiken, bn*
every speech which he has made in
South Carolina since the campaign com
meuoed has breathed a broad and gen
erous patriotism, which should appei 1
to the better nature of the Northern
people. In his speech at Anderson,
some weeks since, General Gary said :
Hie people of this State have reeolved to
follow the example of their twelve eisters.
The galaxy of the South will not bo complete
until this State takes her piece in this splendid
cluster. There is nothing now to prevent her.
The declaim of the Supreme Court is in oui
favor; the House of Representatives in Con
gress wii-hes us God spe -d; we feel the touch
of the elbow of the National Democracy; and
the Stabs is now fired with high hope and firm
resolve. The officers and soldiers of the army
will present anas to ns as we pass in review.
Law. Honor, Truth, Morality and Religion, all
urge ns to this redemption. Tbp spirit of a
broad and liberal statesmanship has declared
in our favor; and the heart tbrobe of the Cau
casian race pulsate in happy unison with our
great resedvee and noble aspir.tions. Under
such auspiMous surroundings, South Carolina
announces that she will on the 7th November,
of this our glorious Centennial, with the spirit
of 1776. take her position by the side of the
original thirteen: aud there she intends always
to remain, the prond peer of every State in
this glorious Union.
We trust that the Cincinnati Gazette
will do General Gary and the people of
South Carolina the justice to publish
the letter denying the statements made
in its Washington dispatch. We can
not be ieve that it would do an inten
tional wrong to serve a partisan pur
pose, and we shall expect it to repair to
the extent of its ability the injury it has
done. All respectable Republican jour
nals should regard with suspicion and
scrutinize osrpfnlly every report that
comes from South Carolina. Chamber
lain and Patpbbson are playing a des
perate gasa# s and will stop at no villainy
to compel snoceea. They are playing*
for “four years more of good stealing.”
the sdcth ANP the east.
A few day# simse ** published a
statement, taken from the books of the
Treasury Department, whioh showed
that the South contributed a large por
tion of the internal revenue taxes
levied by the Generrl Government—
larger in’ proportion to population and
wealth than any oft* section of the
Union. We showed that shgtf South
ern States paid more than twenty ***l
- while the whole of New England
paid leas than three millions. In the
matter of export# the South makes
equally as favorable a Keying. Our
total exports for the past fiscal year
amounted to, ia round numbers, six
hundred and fifty asißiOßa, The Boston
Advertiser, a paper whioh always stands
np stoutly for the honor of New
England, figures np ooe hundred mil j
lions as the share of the Eastern
nifAaa The items it gives as follows :i
Cotton manufactures, eight millions;
iron and steel goods, fourteen millions;
petroleum, thirty-three millions; leather,
nine millions; wood and wooden ware,
seventeen millions; cheese, twelve mil
lions; sugar, seven millions. Every one
knows that New England has nothing
to do with petroleum. Take that item
from the auoount and her exports last
year amounted to only sixty-seven mil
lions, or a little more than one-tenth of
the exports of the country. “The South
ern States furnished exports in cotton
alone to the value pf nearly two hun
dred and fifty miUiona, or largely more
than a third of the whole amount. The
value of tobacco, sugar, molasses, rice,
lumber and naval- store# added shows
that the South tarnishes the bulk of the
exports—Ahe real wealth—of theoountry.
■A SAD DRATH.
We regret to learn the death of W. Ed
gar Jones, Esq., of Brunswick, Georgia.
Mr. Jones was a son of Dr. J. S. Jones, ef
McDuffie oonnty, bnt had moved to
Brunswick to practice his profession—
the law. There he fell an early victim
to the scourge whioh is now devastating
the ooast of Georgia and South Carolina.
He was a young man of great promise
and had already achieved distinction in
his profession. By his death the State
has lost a son who would have done her
great honor in the future. We tender
oar profoandeet sympathy to his family
and trust that the Doer of all Good will
pour balm into the hearts that have
been so sorely afflicted.
. SOUTHERN CONGRESSMEN.
“AH the Democratic members of Congress
from Geor. i* were renominated te day,” was
the brief announcement eent over the wiree on
Saturday. It announces an example which, to
a great extent, conld be followe i to advantage
by other Btates than Georgia. The practice of
sending the same men to Congress year after
year did much to explain the consistency, firm
ness and skill with which the slave power
maintained its supremacy in the Federal Gov
ernment for so long. All questions of sec
tional ambition apart, however, there is no
doubt that the whole country would be better
off than it is, if even the Congressmen of aver
age ability, who are known to be honest, were
kept longer in the service. A man of ordinary
intelligence, who has been in the House one
term is able to do his work better than the
most brilliant member who is freeh in it. This
is largely dn to the fact that the business of
Congress is really done mostly in oommittees,
and tradition, stronger than law, regulates
positions on committees mainly by length of
eervice. But in addition to this Clause, the
training of even one session of aotoal woik is
of great advantage, and no district ought light
ly to lose it from any whim as to the “claims”
of locality or person*.—A* Y. Times.
The Times is right. Congressmen,
and legislators generally, to be of bene
fit to their constituents, most have ex
perience. The new member rarely ac
complishes much in the way of practical
usefulness unless he be a man of nnnsual
talent, or nnless he has exceptional op
portunities. Usually the usefulness of
a legislator increases pari passu with
the length of his term of service. The
doctrine of rotation is both ridiculous
and injurious. Because we have a good
man to-day who has been in offloe long
enough to learu to be useful we must
put him out and take another, just as
good, may be, but who necessarily in
efficient because wholly inexperienced
Sectional or local claims rest upon
no better ground. Either doctrine is
prodnotive of much mischief, and each
if reduced to its legitimate oonolnsion
becomes a glaring absurdity. We are
glad for these reasons, among others,
that the Georgia delegation has been re
nominated. No charges of incompe
tence or misoonduct have been made
against them, and most of them are men
of great ability. They will be able to
render their immediate constituents and
the country generally much more valu
able service in the next Congress than
in this because their talent will be tem
pered by experience. In the United
States SeOate the term of office is so
long that the eleetion of anew member
every six years would not do muoh harm.
Bnt even the Senate the South has
often kept her representatives as long
as they chose to serve, and one of
them —Mr. Benton— retained his seat in
that body for thirty consecutive years.
T J*® HERALD'S OPINION.
The Republicans haVfi again nominated Gov
ernor Chamberlain in South Carolina. A few
months ago it looked as if the Governor, whose
course had been offensive to the rin; men in
tho party, would be nominated by the con
servative Republicans, and elected by tb® aid
of the Democrats. The Herald was anxious for
this result, ■ specially as Governor Chamber
lain had shown in the management of South
Caaolina affaire the desire to give the people
an honest government. This effort was sus
tained by the News and Courier, the leading
paper in South Gwolffia, and there was tome
hope that the good sense of tfre people of that
chivalrous State would accept Chamberlain,
as the Democrats of Virginia acoepted
Walker, and, by uniting with the conservative
Republicans, overthrow the carpet-bag negro
element and give the State a good govern
ment. But the polioy which forced South
Carolina into seceaeion. a policy of intolerance
and hatred, succeeded. This indicates the
manner in whieil the Democrats have man
aged their eagipatge. Tferpe months ago South
Carolina could have baea carried for Tilden,
but the Bourbons insist op throwing away
tueir chance, and it now looks inevitable fqft
Haves.
The above is the New York Herald?s
comment upon the camgaign in Sdfltb
Carolina. The ignorance which the
Herald displays whenever it attempts
to disenss Southern politics is absolute
ly amazing. Governor Chamberlain’s
‘ quarrel” with the corrupt element of
South Carolina Republicans was a sham,
just as his attempt# at “reform” were a
sham. He has shown himself to be a
smooth-tongued, selfish schemer, who
never looks beyond his personal interest
and has not a thought higher than his
>wn elevation. Believing six months
ago that the better sentiment of the
North revolted against tha misrule and
corruption whioh prevailed ic South
Carolina under the name of Republican
ism, he trimmed fails sails to meet the wind
and attempted by fur talk and speoions
promises to foist himself as a candidate
upon the Democrats. The Democrats
declined to be deceived by him and
placed a ticket in nomination which
represented the respectability, the intel
lect and the integrity of the State.
When CaAMgBBLAJN discovered that he
had no chanee forajttvtess in this direc
tion and found that the heat of a Presi
dential campaign was stiffing the feel
ing of abhorence with whi#b Northern j
people had commenced to regard the
robber rule that was raining the State,
he speedily chaßged his tacticts. He
threw off the mask he had worn for
a while and row stands confessed
the scurvy knave be is. Me is again
hand in glove with “Honest John v J.
Patterson, Bowen, Whittemore and
£ll)ott, and is running on a ticket
with men so infamous that decent Re
publicans ref nse to support them and are
going over to the Demqorati# gamp* —
The Herald should know that sqeh #
movement as that whisk made Waiter 1
Governor of Virginia cannot be success- '
fal in Sonth Carolina. It has been
tried time aud again, and ia every ia
stance has faded—utterly, humiliating
ly and disastrously failed!. In 1870 the
Democrats ns Jddge Carpenter, of
Ohio, a stannch BepwfiltftD, against R.
K. Scott, and he was defeated. In 1872
they supported Tomlinson, a Norther*
man and a Ijtqpablican, against F. J,
Moses, and Tomlins## was defeated.
In 1374 they supported Judge Gbebn,
a native Republican of high .character,
and Delaney, a negro, against Cjuif j
beela'n and Glkavrs, and Gbcen and
Delaney were defeated. Why, then,
should they wish to adopt this fatal
Pflinjr the fourth time? Why should
they eoeotmfe* defeat again ? The Re
publican party is Carolina is so
utterly corrupt that bo o{.n
be made with it. Every concession \
made or offered by the Democrats has
been considered an evidence of weak
ness by the Baputylican leaders and
emboldened them to tjhe e _a.ejasion of
farther acta of outrage. The Demo-.
crate, this year, have adopted the'
right policy #nd they wiU succeed.—
They have placed in BOffpination men
who command the n*66i>niM> and re
spect of all the people. Whites end!
blacks alike ere willing so trast and'
try them. Many of the better class of
white Republicans are coming over to
the Democracy. Thousands of colored
men we already ia the Democratic
oamp. As eertain as November coaxes,;
the vote of Sonth Carolina will be cost
for Hampton and for Tilden, for Hon
esty and Reform.
•URItE COUNTY MATTERS.
Letters ef Acceptance ef Messrs. Perry, Me-
Elraurrar mmd Wei ten.
tWajfnssboro expositor.]
Waynesboro, September 13, 1876.
To Judge it. H. Herr#, Thomas J. Me-
Elmmvay, Captain W. F. Walton :
Gentlemen—By the Nominating Con
vention of £ the Democratic party of
Brake cotufty, which olosed its session
here to-day, the undersigned were ap
pointed s committee to notify yon that
yon were unanimously chosen by that
body as candidates to represent the
county in the next Legislature, and to
request yonr acceptance. In the dis
charge of a duty so agreeable to ns in
dividually allow us to say that we con
sider the Convention most happy in the
reeuß-Of Its deliberations, and congratu
late the Democratic party and the coun
ty that men so true and worthy have
been selected to defend oar political
faith, and to illustrate her character in
the Legislature of the State. We are,
gentlemen, most respectfully yonr
friends and obedient servants, J. B.
Jones, Dr. 8, O. Rheney, A. Chance, R.
H. Burton, J. M. Murphy, Committee.
Waynesboro, September 19,1876.
To Messrs. J. B. Jones, Dr, S. C.
Hhenry, A. Chance, B. H. Burton, J.
M. Murphy:
Gentlemen— Yonr favor of the 13th
instant, notifying ns of oar nomination,
is received. In aocepting the nomina
tion to be yonr candidates for oar State
Legislature allow ns to thank yon for
the flattering terms in whioh yon are
pleased to mention oar names in con
nection with yonr action. Yon are
aware, gentlemen, that we have not
sought this plaoe, and that we are only
obeying as public servants yonr call. *Hf
at the election we should not prove to be
the choice of the people, we shall feel
no needless disappointments, but, if
elected, we shall go untrammelled to
perform onr whole duty. We are very
truly, yonr obedient servants, Herman
H. Ferry, Thomas J. McElmnrray.
Waynesboro, September 13,1876.
Hon. J. B. Jones, A. Chance, Dr. &,
C. Rheney, R. H. Burton, J. M. Mur
phy:
Gentlemen— Your favor of the 13th
instant is received to notify me of my
nomination as a candidate for the Legis
lature. You are aware, no doubt, that I
was nominated by both wings of the
Democratic party. The men who sup
ported Judge McElmnrray and yourself
as well as those who supported Judge S.
A. Corker and Dr. E. A. Perkins. Now,
to be caDdid with you, I acoeptjthe joint
and .several nominations, all throngo
and through. Both, as I understand,
united on me—both are my friends, and
I, therefore, respectfully decline to unite
myself to either as against the other. 1
am, gentlemen,
Very respetfnlly,
W. F. Walton.
THE POLITICAL PROSPECT.
Authoritative Informatien-Piffuriu* by Those
Who Have Faeto->THden’s Election Ao*
Sored—ln tor motion and Eetimatea of the
Concreealonal Democratic Committee.
Washington, September 16. The
Congressional Demooratio Committee
here, who are engaged in distributing
political information, doouments, and
speeches, keep up a constant and very
extensive correspondence with all partt
of the country, and necessarily seek to
be well informed as to the prospects of
the Presidential election. Great pain*
have been taken to form a sound judg
ment, by seeking facts in detail through
the local organizations, discarding en
thusiastic rep its, and rejecting loose
estimates of supposed strength. Entire
confidence in the election of Governor
Tilden is felt, and nnless all the signs
should prove false, or an unexpected
reaction oocnr, his majority in the Elec
toral College will surprise some of his
friends as much as his most pronounced
opponents. The drift of publio opinion
is favorable, and if the October States
do not disappoint expectation the Presi
dential ’contest will virtually end with
the election of that plain and honest
farmer, “Bine Jeans” Williams, as Gov
eznor of Indiana. The figures to work
out the general result are as follows:
FOR TILDEN. FOB HAYBS.
Alabama * 10 Illinois 21
Arkansas.. 6 lowa 11
California 6 Kansas 6
Connecticut.... 6 Maine 7
Delaware 3 Massachusetts.. 13
F10rida......... 4 Michigan.. 11
Georgia 11 Minnesota 5
Indiana 15 Nebraska 3
Kentucky.,,... 12 Nevada 8
Maryland 8 N. Hampshire. 5
Mississippi 8 Pennsylvania... 29
Missouri 15 Rhode Island,. 4
New York 35 South Carolina 7
North Carolina. 10 Vermont 5
N w Jersey. *.. 9
Oregop 3 Total ...129
Tennessee. 12 doubtful.
Texts 15| Colorado 3
Virginia 11 Louisiana 8
West Virginia. 5 0hi0........... 22
Wisconsin 10
Total 197
Total. 43
Whole Electoral College .369
Necessary jto elect .185
According to figures Tilden
would haye twplye voles to iPWB f and
Hayes would require fifty-si* to eleot.
Conceding to hii# the fopr States classi
fied as doubtfgl, fie tyould still be short
thirteen votes. Where ftf e they to pome
from is a question which the Republi
can managers have not been able to an
swer to their own satisfaction.
The most interesting points at this
tiipo are Indiana and Ohio. No doubt
is entor*#! ngd by the Congressional
Demoe r #tie Go -ne^ittee as to a decided
majority in Indian# far WMhaws. The
estimates generally agr.ee upon W.OQQ,
though there tehf bfi Wgiu §WO
either wav. At tfie ottteft ot the nan
vass the Democrats did UOt poant upon
Ohio at all as one ot the neceassrr ele
ments to elect. Previons distractions
on the ewtroDgy bad wrought bad feeling
and divisions. Mosy they are united
heartily, and the Republicans a,re giving
f round in the manufacturing eofintie#
he Germans are substantially united
for Ttldeo in the cities and towns where
they are mostly found in large numbers.
They have oast o# Skbqrg as a leader—
at least for this ones ion. T fm reports
are encouraging, and the result will be
close; but the State is put down as
donbtfnl Wisconsin is included in
the donbtfnl list, though the accessions
to Tilden are numerous, and the Ger
mane aye jzexlous in his support. The
accounts from there pfaifO the State for
the Democftts decisively.
But for the corrupt Bfturni*g Jfoard
in Louisiana, no donbt of any jtind
would be admitted in regard to that
State. If frauds can control the vote,
and the vote is essential, they will be
perpetrated, gut the belief is general
that the Democratic majority will be so
overwhelming that thh managers will
not venture upon this expert n^t. —
Colorado is olaimed by both parties, but
as it is about to emerge from a Terri- ;
torial condition, the Federal patronage
becomes #3 important faotor in deter
mining the pA&f.Lp. and will be used
without scruple, pf yisjy especially of
two new Senators.
While no (dajm bte beep mafia lor i
South Carolin# it is known that the
colored defection ia - largo enough to
justify great expectations; and tho re
cent local elections prove that in spite !
of threats and violence by the Repub
lican leaders many blacks are separat
ing from the told, joining Tilden olnbs,
and voting the Democratic ticket. This
is the view of the situation taken here
by the most prudent members of the
Congressional Democratic Committee,
though pome of them make much larger
estimate)*, and include States that are
usually e'oneeded fa
TILDEN *NP REFPRb.
Hbadquabtebs Solute## Sailors
National Reform Association, W*-|-
ington, D. C„ September 21, 187fi,— 2o
the Union Soldiers and Sailors: A
grand Moss Convention of Union soldiers
and sailors in favor of reform in the na
tional administration will be held in the
city of Albany, K. Y-, on Thursday, Oc
tober 19th, 1876. Comrades! yonr at
tendance at this convention is earnestly
requested, in order that the country
may understand defendere not
only desire fafajm W nst.nnal af
fairs, but that they shto fiewe Mto
tion of Samuel J. magis
trate to preside over the odmutr#Uon
of the Government, and that they believe
Q Kjg hiß pfttliotisd,
mad his tetofflaty of cuaraoter. Veterans
on arriving fn Albany are requested to
ing Secretary; General J. W. Denver,
General Alphens 8. Williams, Oolonel
P B Fonke, Oolonel C. G. Aleehire,
Major Joseph Brown, Executive Com
miftee' The enrollment already made
gailors jure not m isvor of the pbipetm
tion of Giantism in the election of Hayes
and Wheedere as stated by General Dix
2n§ Kltepojbltoan leaders, but are
in favor of retort# the eleCfaoa of
damsel J. Tilden to the J’res^enqyl
b - <? - P s£St. 1
serve their ffa-iqne and to mores##
their pop-alority.
SECESSION
LETTER OF ALEXANDER H. STE
PHENS TO THURLOf WEED.
The Allege# laMPTiaw With ♦resldenl Tmy
ler—.Hr. Weed’s Cotroberaive Testimony
Cenudet-ed and Aa**er*d-Tl.e Disuslon
leU and Trailers rfjS4B.
. Lbebty Hall, i
Crawfordvillr, la. , Sipt. 10, 1876. (
7o the Editor of tts Herald:
Pressure of Durness, in connection
with my enfeebled physical condition,
has prevented an exiier response to Mr.
Weed’s lost oommaiication (whioh ap
peared id yonr issue of tha 21st nlf)
upon his “Unwrittet Chapter of His
tory." That oommlniaation contains
matter which I cannt permit to pass
unnoticed, and thereire I must ask of
yon the indulgence <f a further nse of
yonr columns for soup comments (few
and brief as possible, upon this very
long as well as very exfaordinary paper.
In it he claims that he has substan
tially established the ©rrectness of his
original statement, rton whioh, and
upon whioh alone, I jiined issue with
him. He now, howepr, virtually ad
mits that his memonwas at fault in
several particulars, bough he insists
that its substance has teen fully main
tained. Bnt let us seehow the faot is ;
and let tli9 public judg whether he has
presented in it even thishade of a shad
ow of a fact to snstain fia original state
ment, either in letter <j spirit, and, in
deed, whether he is nd quite as mnch
at fault in his last comaunioation as in
his first. His first staiement, be it re
membered, was that Ik. Olingman, ot
North Carolina, Mr. Tlombs, of Geor
gia, and myself, had ai interview with
General Taylor while be was President,
in whioh we endeavored to indnoe him
to veto the bill admittihg California as a
free State ; that the interview was a
stormy one, with threats of disunion on
the one side and having on the other.
It was this in its every as
pect, in whole and in part, upon which
I joined issue with Mi, Waed. I affirmed
that no snch interview, nur any one like
it, had ever taken place between the par
ties named, nor betweeniGeneral Taylor
and any other persons ia my presence.
Mr. Clingman affirms the same thing of
himself in his publishedletter in your
paper. So also states Gineral Toombs
in his letter which I haj published iu
my last communication <ii this subject.
These letters of Mr. Tclmbs and Mr.
Clingman, besides the ffray of indis
putable historical facts of the day,
showed conclusively tb|t Mr. Weed’s
memory was at fault. While he vir
tually admits this, as I fiive just stated,
yet he most extraordineiily comes out
again and claims in his hst production
that he has substantially established the
correctness of his first safement. Now,
upon what grounds doa he rest this
claim t I shall deal birly with Mr.
Weed, and give him thefnll benefit of
every particle of eviince which he
oites or adduces in snskinment of bis
position o! having sublantially estab
lished the correctness oj his first state
ment.
First—He cites Mr. Tiombs’ letter, in
which he said that he hid had many in
terviews with General faylor, Borne of
them of a very “decided? character, and
rhat I was present at sone of these. Mr.
Weed Beems to cite thi to make good
chat coloring of his firsi statement of a
“stormy” interview. Jr. Toombs says
several of onr interview! were very “de
cided;” bnt Mr. Weed siems, most sin
gularly, to pass over xnd not notice
what Mr. Toombs says was the subject
or object of those “decided?’ interviews.
They were, as distinctly stated by him,
not to induce General Taylor to veto the
California bill, or any other bill, but to
urge upon him to abandon his policy in
reference to the Territories aid to sup
port the compromise measures which
were intended as a settlement of all
questions then disturbing the ptace and
narmony of the different sectioni of the
Onion. He also distinctly states that
though several of these intervieVs were
of a very “decided” character dp both
sides, yet iu none of them was there any
such language used as that stated by
Mr. Weed. Now, is it not most singu
lar and remarkable to cite this from Mr.
Toombs’ letter as evidence to sustain
his assertion that Messrs. Toombs,
Clingman and myself urged General Tay
lor to veto the California bill, when Mr.
Toombs distinctly states that the object
of these interviews was to induce Gen
eral Taylor to nse the power of his ad
ministration in support of the compro
mise measures, one of which was the ad
mission of California as a free State ?
So far from Mr. Toombs’ statement sus
taining Mr. Weed’s version of the “de
oided,” or, if he pleases so to character
ize it, “stormy” interview, it moit clear
ly knocks every prop from under it.
Second—As new evidence in his be
half Mr. Weed addnoes a letter from Mr.
Hamlin of a recent date. I shall give
him the full benefit of this most notable
testimony. Mr. Hamlin says that a cer
tain nomination made to the Senate by
General Taylor was before a committee
of tyhipji he was a member; that charges
had beep pjade again pt tbepopjinee, and
that he received a note frog) the Secre
tary of the President requesting him to
call and see the President next morning
on the subject. He accordingly called
the next morning and sent in his card,
and received a message that the Presi
dent was then very much engaged, but
to wsit and he would see him after
awhile. |n about fc&Jf an hour he re
ceived word that the Brpaifient would
then see ftiig. After these prelimina
ries, of tyhiph I haye given the sub
stance. Hamlin goes on to say;
“fimweiiiately repairpfi to the Presi
dent’s room. Ab I ias appFQ§ohing the
door Robert Toombs and Alexander H.
Stephens, of Georgia, came out. They
were excited in their manner to a de
gree that attraoted my attention. We
di4 not speak to each other. I went
into tjjp sept’s room and found him
alone. jHe was flyijjfpnfjy muoh excited.
J haye frequently sajd tbaf fye
like au euFagefi liop ip his page as the
best description I could giyp. fp fapt,
he must have walked across the room
some three or four times before he even
noticed me after my entrance. He then
spoke to me, but still continued pacing
the room, pjo| tng it several times more.
He then addressed me yith an inquiry
—•Mr. Ha nlin,’ said be,'‘whai< a>,e ypu
doing at the Senate with the Omnibus
bill ?’ (so called) then before the Senate.
My reply was prompt: ‘Mr. President,
1 belfeyp thg bijl wjrong in principle ; and
I am doing wh(-t f fffft po defeat it.’ His
rejoinder was a# ptogjinf gad rery de
cided—'‘Stand firm, don't yield; it g)®®s
disunion, and 1 am pained to learned
that we have disunion men to oontend
with; disunion is treason;’ aud, with au
exnigtlve whioh I will not repeat here,
he s#id, rfipk emphasis which I shall
neyey forget, faqt ff ,t/jey attempted to
carry opt pbpif fohemef whfle Jto was
E resident they should be dealf; with py
law as they deserved, and efeepted,’
Now what does this most remarkable
array of details set forth by Mr. Hamlin
amount to in the issue between Mr.
W/j.ed aud myself ? He seems to think
that it establishes the fact that there
was something amd to the interview
from which Mr. Bailip fi#ya fre saw
Mr. Toombs and myseit departing about j
“disunion on the one side and treason
on the other.” This was his original
statement, and I caD imagine no object
, in hjp addiicinj this letter of Mr. Ham
lin butto AUPWff toiffWv inferentially
on tb#t point. suthow v fails
to dfl py a this. f!pe onfy legitimate in - j
ferenee to fee d/Wb W?\ Hamlms
statement i fast fa /flioft-Uke rage
of General Taylor was atomwdjagainst
Mr. Toombs and myself for urging him
to support the “Omnibus bill, ’ which
everybody knew included the admission
of California ass free State. General
Taylor’s rage, according to Mr- Hamlin,
was at the “Omnibus bill.” This was
what, according to his statement, Oea
etal fr?!°r said “meant disunion and
treaaou. ’ blow ft is pot my object to
speak of .the ii£ptojsab.ilj.ty of Mr. Ifam
lin’s version of this m after, f ean only
say that fu# memory, it seems to me,
must bo gyeatly at fault; for who were
at the head of this scheme of “disnnion
and treason ?” Who were urging the
passage of this “popjpromi*®” or “Omni
bus bill?” Everybody knows M)* 4 Mr.
Clay was its chief champion, while
Donglas, Cass, Webster and Fillmore,
to say nothing of many of the
.most devoted friends of the Union our
history has ever produced, supported or
favored it. A “ scheme of disunion
and treason” indeed ! So for from
looking or tending to disunion, its ob
ject wAs fo conciliate the opposing sec
tions and interests ana promote a per
petual #hd ’ harmobious ’ jCtaion of co
eqtial Sfatet- Tjje sum and substance
of Mr. Toombs'and uiy offense, accord
ing to Mr.,Hamlin, was not our opposi
tion to the admission of California os a
free State, bnt onr urging upon General
Taylor that line of policy which would
not only secure this, bat might also
pacify the country and strengthen the
Dfftoto 2 776 were “ disnnioniste,”
oecoruingfto Mr. Hamlin, then wer All
the supporters of • the • Omnibps bill”
likewise disnnionists. These support
ers, it is well known, constituted a ma
jority of both Houses of Congress, in
cluding the parest statoeinen and
brightest lights of the Republic. Nay,
fot ouretrzrso in this matter, we
were traitor*, then- aa< overwhelming
majority ot the people of the United
States were also traitors,'for those of
twenty-seven States ot the Union voted
in 1552 for Pierce tor President, who
tally and cordially indorsed these “com
promise measures,” whioh constituted
the “ Omnibus ’bill,!” tWHIa General
Scott, his opponent, who refused t > in--
done them, received the votes of four
States only. Tbs rote in Hie Electoral
Colleges stood; For Pierce and the
“ compromise measores,” 264, and for
Scott, 42 only. General Taylor, if he
had lived, would most assuredly have
had a big as well as horrible job on his
hands, too, in hanging such a host of
“ traitors.”
Mr. Hamlin certainly did not well con
sider his letter before giving it to the
public. I do not assume to impeach
eitli -r his veracity or integrity, but it
does seem to me that his memory must
be at fanlt. It is hardly possible, or
even probable, that General Taylor could
have acted and Bpoken as he represents
him. It is, indeed, almost incredible
that General Taylor should have charac
terized the “compromise measures” of
1860 as a “scheme of disunion and trea
son.*’
But the most extraordinary part of
Mr. Weed’s last communication is that
in which he links his interview with
General Taylor with that of Mr. Hamlin.
His words are as follows :
“I found the President, as Senator
Hamlin left him, walking exoitedly
across the room. After inquiring wheth
er I had ‘met the traitors,’ he re
lated with much feeling and in strong
language what had jast occurred. He
said that they had endeavored to intimi
date him in the discharge of his duty by
threats of disunion, and that he had
told them that if they attempted to
carry their threats into execution he
would personally take oharge of the
army, and that the leaders taken in re
bellion would be hung with less hesita
tion than he hung spies and traitors
in Mexico.” Now, without assuming
to assail Mr. Weed’s veracity, I do most
respectfully submit to him, as well as
the public, whether, in view of numer
ous contemporaneous facts, it is prob
able even that General Taylor could
have expressed himself to Mr. Weed as
he is here represented to have done. If
General Taylor related to him What had
occurred at the interview, as stated by
Mr. Hamlin, had Mr. Toombs and I
urged any disunion scheme except the
support of the “Omnibus bill,” or the
“compromise measures,” as they were
generally called ? And is it at all prob
able that he would have characterized
us as traitors for doing just what the
noble band of patriots I have just re
ferred to were doing ? Most men who
talk or write loosely are often utterly
upset in their creations of fancy by
a single little fact. It is Oliver Wendell
Holmes, I believe, who so beautifully
illustrates the mishap and disaster which
often attends the most brilliant conver
sations in this way. The gorgeous
bubble, with its rainbow tints, is burst
by the simple touch of the point of a
fact. Now, Mr. Weed in this statement
certainly overdid the matter. He says
that General Taylor iftformed him "that
he had told them (Messrs. Toombs aud
Stephens) that if they attempted to ccu-ry
their threats into execution he would
personally take command of the army ,
and that the leaders taken in rebellion
would be hung with less hesitation than
he hung spies and traitors in Mexico."
This is certainly a highly wrought pa
triotic sentiment; bnt the gorgeous
bubble, as it is here produced, cannot
stand the touch of a single but notori
ous fact, historical in its character —and
that is, that General Taylor, in his whole
campaign in Mexico, never ordered the
shedding of human blood except in the
heat of battle. This was so stated by
Mr Crittenden in a campaign speech in
1848, delivered at Pittsburg, Pa. Gene
ral Humphrey Marshall/ who was col
onel of a regiment in his command and
who was present, thus spoke on the
same subject in a campaign speech of
the same year : “His (General Taylor’s)
conduct in sparing the deserters who
were captured at Buena Vista exhibited
at the sa ee time in a remarkable man
ner his benevolence and his judgment:
• Don’t shoot them,’ said he ; * the worst
punishment I will inflict is to return
them to the Mexican army.’” But, to
put the matter beyond all dispute, a
letter was written by General Taylor, at
Baton Rouge, La., August 6, 1848,
which was extensively published during
the Presidential campaign, in which he
distinctly said : “Not a drop of Ameri
can blood was shed by my order while
in Mexico, nor that of a Mexioan, ex
cept in the heat of battle.” What is to
be thought of Mr. Weed’s statement in
view of this fact ? Is it at all probable
that General Taylor in so short a time
after this solemn declaration should
have so untruthfully boasted of how he
had hanged spies and traitors in Mexi
co ? I repeat Ido not assail Mr. Weed’s
veraoity, but I do assume to question
the accuracy of his memory. On this
point the public must judge for them
selves.
I said in the outset of this controver
sy that I should not be led into a dis
cussion with Mr. Weed of any questions
exoept those growing out of the distinct
and isolated issue I made with him. He
has in all his communications, from the
first, endeavored to wander and to draw
me into other and extraneous matters.
I shall not follow him in these. I have
treated of all of them fully in my work
upon the war, and having now, I think,
most clearly and completely shown his
utter failure to sustain the correctness
of that statement in his “ Unwritten-
Chapter of History,” against which I
protested, I have nothing further to add
upon the subject. The controversy
here, therefore; ends op my part, unless
he shall essay to bring other proofs to
sustain his side of the issue I made.
Thanking you, Mr. Editor, for the use
of your columns for the vindication of
what I deem the truth of history, and
without any feeling or ill will or even
uncharitableness toward any one, I re
main yours, most respectfully,
Alexander H. Stephens.
EDGEFIELD AROUSED.
Tljo Maas Meeting at Ridge Spring—Who
Will Do There What Will • Done-
The Speakers.
[Mdgefieid Advertiser ]
The following enthusiastic letter from
Louis W. Youngblood, Esq., of Bates
burg, will explain itself. We rejoioe
that the Ridge is contemplating such
brilliaut things. Quward ! onward !
onward 1 is the cry ;
Messes. Editoks— A-9 use of the Qonj
mittee of Invitations from “ Norris
Township Democratic Club,” I am in
structed to address you upon the Ridge
Spring Mass Meeting, to be held at that
place on Saturday, the 7th Ootober.
Ward and Mobley Townships
have iinithd wq Weed HP 00 f? ivin ß a
well ordered barbdcije, which the in
habitants of the universe are cordially
and earnestly invited to attend and to
listen to the “bright particular stars”
of Qeorgia and the A beau
tiful banner will be unfurled qnd hoist
ed to the fcreeje ; the “Johnston’s Brass
Band " will render tfie sir yoal with its
dulcet strains, and lovely woman will
lend her presence to enthuse, enchant
and inspire the “sterner sex ” to deeds
of “noble daring.” Torchlight proces
|ion and transparencies will be the con
cluding Svjene ffoqi Bidge Spring to
Leesyille,' a distance ten miles, and
“Banners ip breeds will stream so bright
That birds w4l sing and think it were not
night."
We have already heard from two of
Georgia’s noble sens and Ciceros, Cols.
W. D. Tutt and John D. Ashton, who
inflate onr hearts thus: “I know of no
eidftßß which would justify me in refus
ing toaid yffp. ’in the glorious work of
reform in the old -Palmetto §ti;te. ’ I
will therefore, Providence permitting
endeavor to be with you on that occa
sion, and if I can but be instrumental
turning one poor deluded colored
man from *he political error of his way,
f shall feel that my jwiesjen }ias been
gloriously fulfilled. * Mie ofhef says,
“anj iwith pride and earnest pleasure
will f join in yost noble and heroic
struggle to redeem the gppdeat of
States from the thraldom o| insolence,
tyranny and eorrnption. Bo assured j
that the heart and soul of every Geor- |
§ian i* with yon in the pending contest, i
laU well that those who risked i
their lives for their oouiil.’J m .
war, will never betray her honor in time j
of peacp." ’Jhis sounds like the “ring j
of the' true “raetal.’' JB6es ft not?
.Several of South Carolina’s Demosthenes
have responded, whose tones beat in
perfect mason with onr sister State. —
Other bright planets, vi?: Hill, Gordon,
ynce, etc., have not as yet replied, bnt
pre confidently expected.
Invite, on opr part, every colored
Democratic Club in Edgefield—every
colored Democrat individually nay
more, every colored man who loves hon
esty and the land that gave him birth.
Tell them that the Bidge will welcome
them, and treat them well. Remind
them that Sonth Carolina is their home
as well as oars, that their citizenship
demands as mnch of them as of us.
Bid them vote for Hampton and help
os to redeem oar State. And laat bnt
not jaast, Messrs. Editors, bp with us
on this auspicious occasion yourselves,
for rest assured thai the Advertiser
lives deep down in the heart of the
Ridge. .
DEATH ON THE RAIL.
A Fatal Accident an the Paa Hoodie Road.
CoLPiiEUS, Ohio, September 22 —At
Black. lack tho Pan gandle road train,
going forty miles am hoar, jamped tfce
track down an embankment of twenty
five or thirty feet. The engine, baggage
and mail oars remained on the track
The killed and wounded w- re brought
here. Two men and two children were
killed ontright; between thirty and for
ty were more or less wounded, many of
whom proceeded. Among 1 the wounded
is Mrs. W. H. Ellis, of New Orleans,
badly braised about the head. Ns oth
er Southerners. Three of the wounded
are dead. The track and wheels of the
ears have been examined, and are aH
perfect, The tureident is unaccountable.
THE SUPREME COURT.
DECISIONS RENDERED SEPTEM
BER 10 TH, 1876.
[Atlanta Constitution .l
Bean St. Cos. et. al. vs. Hadley. Com
plaint, from Fulton.
Wabnbb, C. J.
This was a motion made in the Court
below for anew trial on various grounds
in a case which was assumed to be an
action of complaint for land, and on the
trial of which it was assumed the jury
had found a verdict for the plaintiff
against the defendants. The record con
tains a brief of evidence, a charge of the
Court, and a motion for anew trial, and
an order overruling the same. On ex
amining the reoord as it is presented
here there is no declaration or other
pleadings going to show what was the
nature or character of the plaintiff’s ac
tion in the Court below, nor does the
record show that there was ever any ver
dict rendered in favor of the assumed
plaintiff against the assumed defend
ants, or that any judgment had been
rendered thereon which this Court can
review, either for the purpose of revers
ing, or affirming the same. The plain
tiffs in error in their bill of exceptions
complain that a certain verdict and
judgment were rendered against them
in a certain described suit, io which
Hadley was plaintiff, and O. B. Bean &
Cos. defendants, to recover from the de
fendants certain real estate described in
the declaration which is contained in
the reoord. It was therefore inoum
bent on the plaintiffs in error to show
affirmatively by the record that such a
suit had been instituted, that a verdiot
and judgment had been rendered against
them in that suit.
Inasmuoh therefore as the record be
fore ns does not contain any declaration
of any suit for land, in which Hadley is
plaintiff and U. B. Bean & Cos., defend
ants, and no verdict and judgment
thereon which this Court can review,
either for the purpose of affirming or
reversing the same, it is ordered that the
writ of error be dismissed.
Crutchfield vs. Coleman. Injunction,
from Bibb.
Warner, 0. J.
This was a bill filed by the oomplain
ant against the defendant praying for an
injunction to restrain the defendant
from the erection of a stable on his lot
adjacent to the house of the complain
ant in the city of Macon, on the ground
of its being a nuisance. On the hearing
of the motion to show cause why the in
juctiou should not be granted, various
affidavits were read by the respective
parties as to the injury which would re
sult to the complainant by the erection
of the stable by the defendant as alleged
in the complainant’s bill. The affidavits
were distressingly conflicting. The
Chanoellor refused to grant the injunc
tion prayed for, and the oomplainant ex-,
cepted. There is nothing in this case
to take it out of the general rule so often
announced by this Court, that it will
not interfere to control tho discretion of
the Chancellor in refusing to grant au
injunction, unless that discretion has
been grossly abused. Lat the judgment
of the Court below be affirmed.
DeGraffenried vs. Brunswiok and Al
bany Railroad Company. Case, from
Berrien.
Warner, C. J.
Tins was a proceeding in the nature
of a oill in equity filed by the oomplaiu
ant, in behalf of herself and son, as the
widow and child of Spencer DeGraffen
reid, against John Screven, receiver of
the Brunswick and Albany Railroad
Company, to reoover damages for the
killing of the said Spencer DeGraffen
reid in the county of Berrian. The com
plainant alleges that the said receiver of
the aforesaid railroad company was ap
pointed by the Superior Court of Glynn
county, in this State, to take oharge of,
manage, and run said road for the bene
fit of the owners aud creditors thereof;
that whatever damages she may be enti
tled to recover for herself and ward will
be lost to them, by reason of the insol
vency of said railroad oomnany and its
owners, therefore she prayed that the
Judge of the Superior Court of Berrien
county would grant an injunction en
joining said receiver from paying out,
and to hold in his hands a sufficient
amount of the accrued and accruing as
sets of said railroad company as will
fully meet any judgment that may be
rendered in her favor. On the 3d Sep
tember, 1873, the Judge of the South
ern Circuit ordered an injunction
to issue as prayed for, subject to the
further order of the Court, with leave
to defendant to move a revocation of
said order on ten days’ notice - to plain
tiff’s attorney. The defendant filed a
demurrer to the complainant’s bill, and
made a motion to dissolve the injunc
tion. The Court sustafned the motion
on the ground that there was no allega
tion in complainant’s bills that au
thority or permission to sue said receiv
er had been granted by the Court ap
pointing said Screven receiver, where
upon the complainant excepted. There
was no error in sustaining the demurrer
and dissolving ' the injunction on the
statement of facts contained in the
record, Screven, the receiver, was the
officer and servant of the Superior Court
of Glynn county, which Sad appointed
him, was bound to obey its direction
and was responsible to no other tribu
nal. Code, 3150. That a receiver Ap
pointed by a court of chancery cannot
be sued for the assets placed in his
hands, or be disturbed in the possession
aud management thereof without first
obtaining leave of the Court appointing
him, is not an open question in the
Courts of this State. Field et al. vs.
Jones et al., 11th Geo. Rep., 413 Sore
ven vs. Clark 48th Geßep., 41. Hen
derson vs. Walker, decided at July
term, 1875. Thurman vs. Cherokee
Railroad Company, deoided at January
term, 1876, not yet reported. Let the
judgment of the Court below be affirm
ed.
Chisolm vs. Atlanta Gaslight Company.
' Non suit, from Fulton.
Warner, C. J.
The plaintiff, Chisolm, sued the At
lanta Gaslight Company in the Justice’s
Court fdr the sum of $ 100 for damages
done to his store house in the city of
Atlanta, by the explosion of gas. The
Justice gave judgment for the defen
dant. The plaintiff entered an appeal
to the Superior Court. On the trial of
the appeal, the Coqrt after hearing the
plaintiff's evidence on motion of the de
fendant non-suited the plaintiff. Where
upon the plaintiff excepted. There was
no dispute that the plaintiff’s storehouse
was injured the amount claimed by the
explosion of gas therein'; but the ques
tion is whether there was sufficient evi
dence to ptakp opt a prpna facie case
of negligence on the part of the defen
dant to entitle the plaintiff to go to the
jury under the law. It appears from the
evidence that the storehouse had been
vacant two or three weeks before the
explosion, which took place on the
Sfth of January, 1874. Qn the evening
the expiosjop took place the plaintiff
had rented the house to some colored
people for the purpose of having a sup
per there—the colored people did not
use gas that night, but used candles.
Rhodes, defe dant’s superintendent, a
witness for the plaintiff, stated that
plaintiff had gas fixtures in his store
house, that on- the 21th of December,
18)3, the was notified that
the house tyas vacant and thqt gas was
no longer needed, ana defendant was
ordered to cut it off, which was done
on that day by means of a metor-cock
in plaintiff’s cellar. The witness stat
ed thaf tj)ere were two ways to cut off
the gas from plaintiff’s house—the one
by a meter-cock, which w a @ tbp prop
erty of tjie plaintiff, but yf&a used by
the defpncjanj; ajsq—fjie other by a sep
j vice-dock which was under the curb
j stone, and which was the property of
defendant and under his exclusive con
i trol; that if the gas had been out off at
| the service-cock on the 24th of Decem
ber, 1575, of at the meter-cock,
the explosion in plaintiff’s house coma
not have occurred; that in outting off
gas, the defendant sometimes used the
servioe-ccck ; that it was safer to out
off the gas by the Service-cock Un
der the curb-stone than by the meter
cock in the cellar, for the reason that
the service-cock was under the ex
clusive control of defendant. The wit
ness examined the jpeter-gock in plain
tiff’s cellar sopn after the explosion, and
it had evidently beep tampered with by
somebody ; foam! nail in the pole of
the meter-cook, which witness supposed
had been used to turn it, tbongh the gas
was turned off when he examined it;
knows that the gas most have got into
the house in that way, that is, by some
unauthorized person turning the meter
cock in the cellar. The injury to the
plaintiff’s hopsp by the explosion of gas
therein resulted fr 6 the eepape of gas
from- the meter-cock in the plaintiff’s
cellar, or fyoija gad fixtures connected
therewith, ft is insisted by the defend-i
ant i * error that the explosion was
caused by the careless negiigenee of the
plaintiff or his tenants. The reply is,
that if the defendant had shut off the
gas at the service-cock, instead of at the 1
meter-cock in the plaintiff's cellar, on 1
the 28th of December, 1873, when 1
it notified that the plaintiff
bad. no further use for its gas i
on his premise*; tfee explosion i
would not haveoccnrred in that hpnso *
on the sth of January, 1874, lor the sim- '
pie reason thit there would not have i
been any of the defendant’s gas on the I
plaintiff's premise* to explode either by J
the negligence of the plaintiff or his ■
tenant*. - The plaintiff had no reason to ’
suppose that any of the defendant’s gas <
was on bis premises, after it was not*- I
fled to cot it off on the 28 hof DeOt tt- <
her, 1888, wad, therefore, was not bound <
to take any precautionary action in rela
tion to the escape of it, either by himself
or tenants. The principle applicable to
the defendant is this, that in the con
duct of its business as a gas producer
and furnisher thereof to its customers
it is bound to nse such ordinary skill
and diligence as is proportioned to the
delioacy, difficulty and nature of that
particular business. The evidence in
the record before ns is, that the gas was
cut off at the meter-cock in the plain
tiff’s cellar instead of at the Bervice
cock nnder the ourbstone; that it was safer
to ent of the gas at the service-cock
than at the meter-cock; that if the gas
had been cut off at the service-cock on
the 28th of December, 1873, the explo
sion on the sth of January, 1874, in the
plaintiff’s house, could not have occur
ed. In onr judgement, there was suf
ficient evidence to have been submitted
to the jury for them to say whether the
explosion of the gas in the plaintiff’s
house was caused by the defendant’s
negligence or not, and that the granting
of the non-suit was error. Biggers vs.
Pace, sth Geo. Rep., 171, it was held
that a motion for non-suit should be
overruled where the jury might have in
ferred facts from the evidence which
wonld support the plaintiff’s aotion.
The question of negligence or no negli
gence on the part of the defendant was
a question for the jury, and that ques
tion shoal i have been submitted to 1
them under the evidence contained in
the reoord. Let the judgment of the
Gonrt below be reversed.
Dobbs vs. Protho et al. Injunction,
from Cobb.
Warner, C. J.
This was a bill filed by the oomplain
ant against the defendants, praying for
an injunction to restrain the collection
of an exeoutioß*issued upon a common
law judgment obtained against him.
On the hearing of the motion for an in
junction, on the allegations contained
iu the complainant’s bill, the Chancel
lor refused to g;ant it, whereupon the
complainant excepted. The complain
ant’s equity, according to the allega
tions of his bill, is that the
as the executors of Evan Pothro, sued
him for the sum of $370, which he was
indebted for money received by him for
said executors for the rent and sale of
the Powder Springs place, in Cobb
county, by the direction and request of
said executors, and in March, 1875, ob
tained judgment against him for that
amount; that the complainant’s wife was
one of the legatees of Evan Pothro, who
died in. South Carolina in 1864, leaving
a considerable estate; that the defend
ants, as executors of their testator, have
in their hands, or have appropriated to
their own use, more than $3,500 belong
ing to complainant as one of the lega
tees of said estate; that there are no out
standing debts against the estate of
Evan Pothro or any just or legal reason
why the defendants should oolleet
t said judgment from the complain
ant, and that said executors are
insolvent. The complaiuant does not
seek to attack the judgment ren
dered against him in favor of the execu
tors of Pothro, but only seeks to re
strain the collection of that judgment
upon the ground that it would be iu
equitable and unjust to do so iu view of
the allegations contained in his bill. As
suming that the judgment agaiust the
complainant was properly obtained, as
the bill does, still there wonld be no ne
cessity for its collection by the execu
tors merely for the purpose of paying it
back to the oomplainant as one of the
legatees of their testator, aud especially
1 onght not the executors to be allowed to
! oolleet the amount of the judgment out
of the oomplainant as a legatee when
they are insolvent, and unable to re
spond to him for that part of his legacy
if they shall be permitted to obtain pos
session thereof. Carter vs. W. Michael,
20th Geo. Rep. 96; Moody vs. Ellorbie,
administrator, 36th Geo. Rep. 666; Dor
sey vs. Simmons, 49th Geo. Rep 245. Iu
view of the allegations contained in tine
complainant’s bill, assumiug the
to be true (as the demurrer thereto
does), the Chancellorerred in sustaining
the defendant’s demurrer to the com
plainant’s bill for want of equity, and in
refusing to grant the injunction prayed
for, inasmuch tg that judgment was
contrary to the well established princi
ples of equity as recognized by this
Court in the cases hereinbefore cited.
Let the judgment of the Court below be
reversed.
Fletoher, adm’r, vs. Renfroe, Treasurer.
Mandamus, from Fulton.
Bleckley, J.
1. An executive warrant upon the
treasury of the State, authorizing the
payment of money in pursuance of an
appropriation made by law, is not a con
tract nor in the nature of a oontraot, but
is only a license or power, and is re
vocable so long as the payment which it
warranted has not beon made. 2. If re
vocation cannot take place by the sepa
rate act of the Governor, it can take
place by the joint act of the Governor
aud the General Assembly, and a resolu
tion passed by both Houses and ap
proved by the Governor, instructing the
Treasurer not to pay the warrant, is a
virtual revocation. 3. In the face of
such a resolution, the judioiary will not,
by mandamus, compel the Treasurer to
reoognize the warrant and pay out mo
ney under it. Judgment affirmed.
Thompson ns. Chapman. Warrant te
remove tenant, from Fulton.
Bleckley, J. •
1. In an affidavit made to obtain a
warrant to dispossess a tenant, it is suf
ficient totdesoribe the premises as “a
house and lot at East Point, in said
county aud Htate, being the place where
J. D. Thompson (the tenant) now re
sides.” 2. That the premises are not
described in equivalent language in a
deed offered in evidence by the landlord
will not render the deed inadmissible,
where there is evidence aliunde going
to show that its descriptive terms em
brace the same property. 3. It is not
necessary, on an issue of tenancy or no
tenancy, to prove title from the State.
4. If a tenant, upon being informed that
a purchase from his landlord is contem
plated and that it is dependent upon bis
agreeing to yield possession at the end
of his term, consents to do so, and the
person about to purchase acts upon that
oonsent, making the purchase, and
thereupon the tenant repeats the ven
dee, it is an atonement, and is equiva
lent, in law, to an express oontraot to
hold nnder the vendee for the residue of
the term. 6. The residue in this case
being one month, it was oompeteut for
the vendee, after the mouth expired and
after the tenant had refused to surren
der possession, to treat him as his lessee
for a month, and obtained a warrant for
his removal accordingly. Judgment af
firmed.
Tuggle, executor, vs. Atlanta. Com
plaint from Fulton.
Bleckley, J.
1. The erection of an extensive iron
bridge in lieu of a wooden one, ou a
street, over a wide railroad out, is an
important improvement, beneficial to
the pnblio, and justifying the disuse of
the street at the point to be bridged for
a length of time discretionary with the
municipal authorities, so that their dis
cretion be not grossly abused. 2. The
new bridge being one hundred and forty
feet in length, sixty feet wide, and cost
ing fourteen thousand dollars, there was
no abuse qf discretion iu allowing the
chasm in the street to remain nnbridged
for four mouths after the wooden bridge
was removed, aud in consuming that
much time in having the new bridge put
in its place. 3. An adjacent property
holder whose rents were diminished twen
ty-five per qeut. during the ti me t he bridge
was down has no cause of action against I
the city for damages. Judgment affirm
ed. —-
East Rome Town Cos. vs. Nagle et al. )
Injunction, from Floyd.
Bleckley, J.
Discretion not abused by granting the
injunction. Parties must acquiesce in a
liberal use of discretionary powers by
the circuit bench. Judgment affirmed.
Drake vs. Ilush. Claim, from Dooly.
Bleckley, J.
1. It is not the office of a promissory
note given for borrowed money to se
cure the application of ' the money by the
borrower to a given object, although the
purpose for which the money was bor
rowed be < in the note. There
fore, a rodg!i}pn|; bp tfre pqte, p* such,
is no adjudication upon troy right of the
lender, growing ppt of tp*t part of the
instrument. 2. A representation made
in writing may be contradicted by parol,
except where it operates by way of
estoppel. After being aoted on, it will
so operate upon some issues, but may
not upon others. If, in reference to the
issue qp trial, the party acting upon the
representation was, at the time he acted,
in no Wone'Case with tpe matte? of the
representation false than with -it time,
there i* pb estoppel which affects that
isspe, and the f-eprespntetjq’n play be
contradicted. 8. Jn 1872 land te the
extent of the exemption allowed by the
Code prior to the Constitution of 1868
was exempt as against a claim for the
purchase money. Consequently, a per
son ip that year lent money to an
other-to pay lot land was ip no worse
sitoatiop.ro. respect fo that exemption,
if the land had been previously paid tor
by the borrower, than .if that specific
money had been applied te the purchase.
In either case the exemption would pre
vail After the land bad been duly laid
off, in 1873, as exempt, and after the
passage of the act of 1874 repealing ex
emptions as against purchase money,
asd after judgment, in 1876, upon the
note for the borrowed money, and levy
of execution from such judgment on the
laud, it was competent to oontrad'ot a
representation in the note that the money
was borrowed to pay for tiie land ; and
parol evidence was admissible for that
purpose, on the trial of a claim inter
posed by the wife of the purchaser, and
founded on the exemption right. Judg
ment affirmed.
John Lellyett vs. Wm. Markham. As
sumpsit, from Fnlton.
Jackson, J.
The opinion of the presiding Judge,
expressed in his charge to the jury, that
an important witness of the plantiff on
the muterial question at issne was “ap
parently interested," is error, and such
error as section 3248 of the Code ex
pressly requires this Court to hold to
be error, to reverse the decision thereon
and grant a nsw trial. Judgment re
versed.
Bleckley, J., having been of counsel
did not preside.
Kent k Cos., et al.,vs. Flumb, trustee,
et al. Iu equity, from Fulton.
Jackson, J.
1. Bale of the wife’s separate estate to
the husband’s creditor to pay his debt
is void, and the purchaser acquires no
title. If the purchaser be not the actual
creditor but his agent, taking the title
in his own name while the facts show
that the real purpose was to collect his
principal's, the creditor’s debt, the sale
is equally void and the deed will bo set
aside. Equity abhors all deoeit, and
will allow nothing to be indirectly which
oannot be openly and directly done—
Code, § 1788, 54 Ga., 548. 2. ft is the
duty of the trustee to preserve and
proteot the trust estate, aud if he
sell real estate settled iu trust upon
the wife and her minor son, and
take a note therefor on the husband
and his partner in failing ciroumstances,
with no security, in order to obtain a
line of credit for said firm by paying
their debt, and if the purchaser be cog
nizant of all the facts, having acted as
agent in thus collecting the debt of the
husband’s creditors, and promising to
proouro them the line of credit from his
principals in order to get the trade con
summated, the trustee is guilty of
breach of trust, the purchaser is parti
ceps or in.inis, and gets no title, though
the trustee be authorized to sell by the
wife’s direction, aud she does direct the
sale, and the deed should be set aside as
well in behalf of the minor as'of his
mother, the wife. Code, Bee. 2326 —2328.
3. The grounds of tho motion for new
trial must he certified to be true by the
Court below before this Court will con
sider them, and anew trial will not be
granted on the ground of the admission
of improper evidence, even if improper,
over objections of the party complain
ing, unless so certified, especially where
the evidence is abuuduut to sustain the
verdict without tho aid of that said to
have been objeoted to. Judgment af
firmed.
Markham vs. Angier, et al. Iu
equity, from Fulton.
Jackson, J.
Equity will relieve against a judg
ment which was obtained by inducing
the defendants thereto to withdraw an
equitable plea they had tiled in the
case, by a promise of the plaintiff that
if such plea were withdrawn he would
do the equity set up iu the plea,
and would enter into writing to that
affect, all of which he failed to do ; and
this Court will not control the discre
tion of the presiding Judge in granting
an injunction until the case may be fully
heard <ju the tnetits, especially when
the complainants’ offer to do equity on
their part by paying up their portion
of the judgment, and when the injunc
tion is granted on that condition. —8 Ga.
Rep., 435-442; 7 Ga. Rep., 396-404,
Judgment affirmed.
Wm. S. Walker vs. O. P. Burt, et al.
Rule to distribute money, from Ber
rien.
Jackson, J.
1. The lien on saw mills, finder section
1,985 of the Code, must be prosecuted
within one year after the debt becomes
due, and if the first proceeding to fore
close, made within twelve months, be
defective and is dismissed, it cannot be
renewed within six months thereafter
under section 2,932 so as to save it, un
less the renewal be also within one year
after the debt falls due. Section 2,982
of the Code applies ODly to ordinary
snits and remedies, and nut to extraor
dinary summary remedies like the fore
closure of such lieu. 2. Even if proper
ly forecloses, the Hen made by a person
in possession, who was neither the true
owner nor his agent, nor his lessee,
wonld not be good against the true
owner; and when the faots show that the
mill bad been sold by agreement, after
bill in equity filed by the true owner to
enjoin the enforcement of the lien, and
the money raised was to stand in the
place of the mill itself, and to be dis
tributed according to the equities of the
several parties, and that the person in
possession ot the mill, and who had
given the lien took possession with the
understanding that he was to have no
title until he had paid for it, and he had
not paid for it, the true owner of the
mill would take the money in preference
to the holder of the lien. 23 Ga., 205;
29 Ga., 408. Judgment affirmed.
Coffee, administrator, vs. Griffin, et al.
Injunction, from Dodge.
Jackson, J.
When tho bill alleges that the admin
istrator of an estate is seeking to en
force a judgment against the heirs, that
the administrator and secuiities are in
solvent, that there are no debts to pay,
that the administrator is himself largely
indebted to the estate, that the shares
of the heirs whose land is levied on to
pay the judgment are largely in excess
of tho amount of the judgment, that
the notes sued to judgmeut were for
laud sold at administrator’s sale and
were to be accounted for in general set
tlement, but not pressed to collection,
that the plea of the heirs to that effect
was withdrawn on the assurance that
the judgment wonld merely stand in
lieu of the notes, and that the provis
ions in the notes, one in writing and the
other left out by mistake, would iu good
faith be carried out:
Held, That there is equity iu the bill,
and' though the answer denies the alle
gations therein, yet if there are affidavits
and counter affidavits for aud against
those allegations, this Court will not
control the discretion of the Chancellor
in granting an injunction until the
whole case can be tried on its merits.
20th Geo., 96; 36th Geo., 866; 49th
Ged, 249. Judgment affirmed.:;
THE EIGHTH DISTRICT,
lion. Alex. H. Stephens* Letter of Aoeepu
Thomson, Ga , Sept 6, 1876.
To ,the Hon Alexander H. Stephens,
Crawfordville, Ga.:
1 DEab Bib— At a Convention of the
1 Democratic party of the Eighth Con
-1 gressioual District, held this day at
! Thomson for the purpose of selecting
a candidate for the next Congress of the
United States, you were nominated by
acclamation, and the undersigned were
apppintad a committee to perform the
pleasing duty of communicating to you
this information. In its performance it
affords us great pleasure to say that the
Contention sought by its action to
evince its gratefnt appreciation of yonr
valuable public services in the past, and
to give assurace of its ardent hopes that
that Providence which has so meroifully
raised you from a bed of sickness will
to spare you to your oonntry.
Allow us in conclusion te subscribe our
selves, very truly aud faithfully, your
friends, James B. Park, Geo. T. Barnes,
3. H. Pilhill. '
Liberty Hall, t
I Crawfordville Ga., Bept. 21, 1876.)
1 Messrs. James.JS. Park, George T.
Bhrnes and J H. Polhill:
S&'i Dear Sirs— Your letter of the 6th
announcing the result of the action
ot the nominating Democratic Conven*
tion that day assembled at Thomson,
was handed to me in person by yonr
Chairman, accompanied by sixteen oth -
er members of the Contention, on fhe
evening of the same day.’ "' To him ain‘4
them I verbally expressed' my great
gratification at f he unity and harmony
in thus presenting my name • again
to the people of the old Eighth
Congressional District for re-election,
and stated that at my leisure I
would give them and the pnblio my for
mal apcpteh°?- 1 J now do, and
take opcasiou, in so dfi'ng, to say te yqq.
and through you to *ll the members of
the Convention and their oonstitnents,
that language would fail me to express
that profound gratitude I feel at this
most rare, if not unparalleled manifes
tation of personal and public regard.
Be assured that, Deo Volente, this confi
dence shall, in no way, prove to have
been misplaced. Should I be elected,
and able to take my seat, as I now have
strong hopes that i shall bp, tho oajy
guaraptea for ‘sy lutiire course is fete,
record of the past. The maintenance o|
the right against wrong in its every
form and shape, which is the great ob
ject of all Constitutional Governments,
shall, be the controlling principle with
me.
To you, gentlemen, personally and in
dividually, I take this occasion to ex
press my kindest regards and beet
wishes. Yours; most respectfully, if
Alexander H. Sibphens.
“It is easier for a canel to go through
the knee of an idol than .for a rich to en
ter Heaven,” is the interpretation which
>i colored p.eaoher. gave te the Sorip
turn
