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 (Oct. 11, 1876)
%ttronici£ anD Yaliuaal Democratic Ticket. FOR PRESIDENT: Samuel J. Tilden, OF NEW YORK. FOB VICE-PRESIDENT : THOMAS A. HENDRICKS, OF INDIANA. State Democratic Ticket. FOR COM)KKH‘(-EIi;HTH district, ALEXANDER H. STEPHENS. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTORS. For Ike State at Ln. A. R. LAWTON. JOHN W. WOFFORD. ALTKKN'ATKS, L. J. GARTBELL, H. D. D. TWIGGS. District kleeteie. First District-A M. Rogers, of Bofke. Alternate, T. E. Davenport, of °f£joond District-R. E. Kennon, of Olay. Alternate, James L. Seward, of Thomaa. Third District—J. M. DaPree, of Ma con. Alternate, W. H. Harrison, of Stewart. . Fourth District—W. 0. luggle, of Troup. Alternate, E. M. Batt, of Ma rion. _ Fifth- District—F. D. Diemnke, of Spalding. Alternate, V?. A. Shorter, of Fulton. Sixth District —Frank Chambers, of Wilkinson. Alternate, M. V. McKib ben, of Butts. Seventh District—L. N. Trammell, of Whitfield. Alternate, Hamilton Yancey, of Floyd. Eighth District—D. M. Dnßose, of Wilkes. Alternate, F. E- Eve. of Co lumbia. ~ Ninth District—J. N. Dorsey, of Hall. Alternate, F. L. HarisiAi, of White. CaßfrfMional Nominalion*. First District— Julian Hartridoe. Second District— William E. Smith. Third District— Philip Cook. Fourth District— Henry R. Habbis. Fifth District— Milton A. Candler. Sixth District— James H. Blount. Seventh District— William H. Dab- District— Alexandeb H. Ste phens. „ _ Ninth District— Benjamin H. Hill, WEDNESDAY. OCTOBER 11. 1876- ELECTORAL APPOINTMENTS. Hon. D. M. Dußose, Democratic Elector of the Eighth Congressional District will address the people of Jef ferson county at Louisville, on Thurs day, October 12th; those of Washington county on Friday, October 13th, and those of Johnson county at Wrightsville, Saturday, October 14th. We are requested to state that Gen. Dußose, Elector of the Eighth Con gressional District, will address the peo ple of Lincoln county on Tuesday, 24th day of Ootober, 1876, during Court week, on the politics of the day. THE GOOD TIMES COMING. It is exceedingly gratifying to notice that nearly all the leading papers of the populous Eastern and Western cities are predicting the Dear approach of good times. An improved activity in trade is already spoken of in a number of localities, and all the indications point to a continued and widespread re vival of bdsiness. The Centennial has had something to do with this, in oreating a demand for our manufactures. The short wheat crop in England is opening a market for our surplus pro duce. Several of the extensive cotton mills of New England which were closed or running on half time are again in full operation, and the labor strikes, bo nnmerons during the past Spring and Summer, have nearly all come to an and by compromise between the em ployed and employers. To the thou sands of mechanics and laborers who Kano ban Inaul JAloao tKIo mill Ka jny ful news. Winter is setting in, and its rigors on the Atlantic slope bring fear fnl suffering to those who are unpre pared to meet them. So general ha * been the stagnation that it is not to be expected that it can be entirely over come in a day ; but the relief afforded jrill be a great mitigation of the pre vailing evil, and tend to rouse the drooling courage of thousands who have almost entirely without hope. The great Miction sale of cotton goods established pi'Mes and made a market. The auction of woolens followed, and settled matters in that trade. Dealers acquired confidence, and Uw dry goods merchants began to do a business which had been unfamiliar to them for years. The coal combination same to grief. The monopolists withdrew tl’eir stocks from the pool and threw them on the market. Down went the price far below the dictated schedule rates, which had no other basis than inhumanity aud avarice. The public have been greatly benefited, aud the coal pro ducers have found a larger sale than they expeoted nud quicker returns. In dustries have reviveif, and householders have had their fuel at reduoed cost, aud at rates which had some show of reason for a basis. A Massachusetts man stood near a railroad track in his native State one re cent Sunday. A train came along, the engine struck a plank—and the plank struck the Massachusetts man and hurt him badly. He sued the company and lost because of a certain Massachusetts law wbioli forbids “persons not engaged in works of charity and religion walking abroad on the Sabbath.” We regret much to see that able jour nal, the Augusta Constitutionalist advo cating the right ef soreheads and inde pendents to disrupt the Democratic party. 11l does it become our respected cotemporary to give publicity to sjich unsound political doctrine at this time. The beauty of its past gallant recor-d as a true exponent of party faith, is all marred and distorted by its present course. We mourn that it is so.— jQriffin News. Captain Bates and his wife, formerly ’ Miss Anna Swan, the giants, whose marriage in London attracted so much attention several years ago, have retired from show life and built a fitting resi dence near Rochester, New York. He is seven and a half feet high, she is an inch taller, and each weighs over four hundred pounds. The rooms of their hocse are eighteen feet high, and the •doors twelve feet. Their bedstead is ten feet long, and all the furniture is proportionally iargfc. The surplus o women in Massachu setts, or rather of women and girls, which was 50,000 in 1870, w *s last year something more than 63,000, ,* be whole number of males in the State 704,383, and of females 857,529. The reason of this uneven division of the aexea is not fully explained, but is ow ing, in great part, to the number of men killed cM in the war, to the hard and ex pensive times we live in, and to the fact that a great number of the young men “go West ” as soon as they become of age. The women should go West too, for the preponderance of men over wo men out there is very greet. (JNe of the interesting subjects to be conß i in the Bankers’ Convention relates to the establishment of a mutual bank insuran ce scheme in connection with the bank decent of the Trea aury. This proposed institution would iosure against losses .*>7 robbery (and p iseibly by fire) on tha principle that the loss of any one bank 1 oa •made up by all the -rest. It is thong t that by keeping a [standard reward .or the disclosure of all contemplated ’our glaries and robberies, these crimes may in large measure be prevented. A cir cular on the subject sets forth these and other considerations which wiU ptt>h ably invite discussion. HIGH AND LOW TAXES The St. Louis Republican says that facts and figures are hard things to get over. Look at this small lot: The Re publican administration asked for appro priations—to pay the expenses of Gov ernment the present fiscal year— $203,- 099 025 48. The Democratic Eonse cut down the bills to $138,752,343 42-a re dnetion of $64,336,682 06. The Repub lican Senate refused to agree, and de manded $168,260,598 63. The House was compelled to compromise on $147,- 719,074 85-a saving on the original ad ministration estimates of $55,380,950 63, and $29,944,152 46 less than the actual appropriation for 1876. In other words, the Republicans wanted to tax the coun try at the rate of $4 83 for each one of oox 42,000,000 population, and did last year actually tax at the rate of $4 28. The Democrats tried to reduce it to $3 32, and did reduce it to $3 51J. The Re publican orators and organs are invited to attack this solid logic of dollars and cents, and get away with it if they can. COMMERCE OF THE UNITED HTATES. The Bulletin says the monthly re turns of the Bureau of Statistics show a continuance of the movement noted for several months past, viz.: a large de crease in imports and an important pre ponderance of exports. The imports of merchandise in August amounted to 335,314,864, as against $44,191,673 for the same month of 1875, and $46,247,- 367 in 1874; the decline compared with the like month of either of the last two years being at the rate of about 20 per cent. The exports of domestic produce for August, expressed in currency val ues, are stated* at $43,286,074. against $35,699,473 last year, an increase of $7,586,627, or at the rate of 31* per cent. The specie exports, however, show a de- cline, being for the month only $2,761,- 030, compared with $4,608,272 last year. figures show that the imports of August did not feel the effect of the general improvemant in business that set in with the opening of the Fall sea son. Indeed, that effect can hardly be expected to appear until the receipts for the Spring trade come to hand. The first eight months of the calendar year show a very remarkable falling off in the imports. The total importations, spe cie included, exhibit a decline, com pared with the same period of last year, of $69,083,779. or at the rate of nearly $103,500,000 per annum. Seven mil lions of this decrease, however, occurs on specie, the importations of which have been only $7,600,000 against $14,- 600,000 last year. • THE LICK LEGACY. James Lick, the rich Californian, whose mnnifleent gift in 1874 for public and philanthropic purposes, will be re membered, died recently in San Fran cisco, in the eightieth year of his age. He was a native of Pennsylvania, and passed most of his earlier business life in South America. He went tp San Francisco in 1847, and invested his mon- ey in real estate judiciously located and became immensely riyh. His ante-mor tem benefaction consisted of about $2,- 000,000, the details of which were chang ed and modified, additions also being made, in another paper signed in 1875 The gift of $700,000 which was before put in the hands of the trustees for con structing an observatory at Lake Tahoe and “procuring for it a telescope of greater power than any yet made,” was bestowed upon the University of Cali fornia for precisely the same purpose as before. The sum of $540,000 was also given to “found and endow the Califor nia School of Meebanio Arts.” There has been considerable trouble already in regard to the disposition of this prop erty, and there have been changes in the Board of Trustees. It is feared l hat the matter will be involved in further complications, and that the intention ©f the testator may be entirely defeated. Mr. Lick leaves a son, a resident of Pennsylvania, who very naturally in clines to take the views of a son and heir in regard to this grand donation, which is said to amount now to about $5,000,000. FACTS) FOR FOREIGNERS. A Washington special says that at a Convention of the Amerioan Alliance, in Philadelphia on the Fourth of July last, Ruthebfobd B. Hayes and Wil liam A. Wheeleb were nominated as candidates of the American Allianoe for President and Vice-President of the United fctates. On the sth of July, in one of the parlors of the Continental Hotel, Governor Hayes reoeived a com munication from that Convention, of which Lamb, of Ohio, was Chairman, which Committee informed Hayes of his nomination, aud Hayes thereupon thank- ed the Committee and accepted the nomination. On the 9th of July, 1876, resolutions of the Convention, with a copy of the Constitution of the Order, oath, address and certificate of honorary membership, were duly presented to Mr. Hates at Cos umbus, Ohio, by a Sneoial Committee of Five, pf which William T. Black was Chairman. Hates accept ed, thanked the committee, and said he would make a formal acknowledgment in writing. On the 10th of July, 1876, through Alfred E Lee, his private Sec retary, he did make a formal acknowl edgment, and indicated to the Society that he would put them in the way of getting mouey t*> help carry the election. The Committee which waited upon Hates at Philadelphia was composed of Lamb, of Ohio; Per TANARUS, of Newark, ST. J.; Warburton, of Hartford, Conn.; Kim ball and Ttler, of New York; and Black, of Pennsylvania. The Committee which was waited upon at Columbus was composed of William T. Black, of Pennsylvania; Lemuel S. Tyler, of New York; C. H. Sjijth, of Connecticut, and Perry, of Newark, N, J. The constitution of the American Al liauce, whose nomination B. B. Hayes has accepted, and whose principles he indorses, and as an honorary member of the Order is bound to snpport, contains these provisions: Article 1. The name of this Order shall be the American Alliance. Akt. 2-Sac. 1. The object for which this Order is organized js for maintenance of American principles, as follows: The amend ment to naturalization laws limiting the suf frage to persons horn in this country, or of American parents; the election of Amenoan bom citizen* only to ofllcial positions in this country. The oath of the membership of 4w#ita* Alliance is as follows: I solemnly swear that I will not vote for any person or persons for any official position in this country under the laws thereof who are not American-born citizens, and that I will not betray any of the secrets of this Order, or give I the name of any person belonging to the same | without his conseut, and that I will faithfully I obey all rules and orders of the same, if not in ( ! conflict with the Constita.ion of the United ' States and State of which I am a resident; and i t%at I will <’o all in my power to forward the | interest of the Order generally, and my Coun | o ii of which lam a member, and of the Ameri -1 can principles in this country. So help me God! resolutions of Nomination and Indorsed* nt ’ after reaffirming the prin ciples of their institution, read as fol lows : ••Order of America* Attlene*—♦■f I*™* 1 *™*- 41 ' Crast Connell of the I nifcnA Acjupn “Philadelphia, July 4, lfltv “At a Conference of the Grand Council of, the United States of America the Alliance, held at Philadelphia Jrly 4 and 6. 1876, the following resolutions were adopted and the Conference recommended all American-born citizens, without distinction ef party, at the ensuing National election to cast their votes in , favor of American prinei 'les as the only safety for the future welfare of this country. -‘•That the nomination of R, B Hates, of Ohio, for President of the Cai ed State#, and Wit. A. Wheeler, of New York, for Vice- President. be, and 'he same are hereby in dorsed by the American Alliance Conference, and we earnestly advise all who are in favor of American prinei lea as ad. ocated and set forth in these resolutions to give theee nominations active and determined support. • By order of the American Alliance Confer* en aa. “L. 8. Tiler, Secretary." Hayes’ letter of acceptance of the membership of this infamously non- American and non-progressive organiza tion is as follows; ‘•Columbus. 0., Ju’y 10, 18T6. “Cjub Sib— Governor lUrrs Jeaires me to acknowledge the receipt of your valued favor of July 7th, inclosing the resolutions of the Alliance, and to say in reply he is deeply gratified by this expression of confi dence. The importance of carrying the State* of New York, New Jersey and Connecticut in the approach ng canvass is folly recognized, and at the proper tioe reference will be given you to committees for such aid end co-opera tion as seems to be advisable. Very reapectfally, limp E. Lu, Secretary. To L. 8. Ttlzb, Box 0,071, New York. SOUTHERN CLAIMS. The Hartford Times well says the “loyal citizens of the South,” after the war, presented many claims of property taken or dispoiled by the Union army. Many of these claims were exorbitant and some were fraudulent. The Court of Claims was the proper tribunal to in vestigate them. Bat about a half dozen years ago Congress appointed a com mission to pass upon them. It was be lieved then that this movement was in the interest of fraud and Lyman Tkum bull, of Illinois, then in the Senate, op posed the scheme. But he was voted down, and the commission was appoint ed. We believe it was President Gbant who remarked that the amount of claims allowed in some cases for injury done to crops, etc., was more than the entire valne of the farm on which the crops were raised. The Democrats have com plained of the frauds practiced under these olaims, and the manner of treating them. Bntitdid no’goed. Like other abuses this one was continued. Now the Radicals have the brassy cheek to charge that if the Democrats oome into power they will bankrupt the Treasury by allowing Southern claims. The Con stitution forbids the payment of claims on account of the rebellion or the eman cipation of slaves; and no one has any iAaa of ovov paying any claim fOT Cither the cost of the rebellion or the slaves. Then, as to claims, for property taken or spoilt by the Union army, the Democrats would permit no abase. They would stop the abuses in regard to them that have been inaugurated by the Republi cans. BEAST BUTLER. An ngly story about Gen. Butler is told by the Boston Herald as coming from a well known Republican Senator of a New England State, who related it to one of Butleb’s friends several years ago, and has been waiting for an explanation ever since. In brief it is this: When the war broke out a Northern man by the name of Potter, an Abolitionist and a Christian, was living in New Orleans. He was ar rested and pat in prison, and his prop erty was seized by the Confederate Government. His inoffensive and gen tle manners had made him many friends, and some of these brought about an agreement by which he was to be allowed to escape from prison on the payment of a sum of money. The snm was raised, and he was permitted to escape, and was cared for by his friends in hiding places in the city. When the Union army captured the city and Butler was put in command of it, Mr. Potter left his hiding place, identified his property, and applied to Butler for a permit to ship it to the North. He was put off from day to day for a long time, till a hanger-on at Butler's headquarters said-to hi a: “You will not make anything by hang ing about here; sell your sugar and ootton to Jack Butler,” the General’s brother. The old man was indignant, and refused to listen to such counsel ; bat after trying again and again for many days more and getting no satis faction, he sold his sugar and cotton to A. J. Butler— the sugar for three cents a pound and the cotton at a propor tionate prioe. Almost immediately af ter the trade was effeoted he saw the sugar and ootton loaded upon Govern ment transports by Government em ployees, and so shipped to the North. The sugar was sold on the wharf in Boston for fifteen cents a ponnd, and the cotton at a proportionate profit. A prominent New Hampshire man, who investigated the subject, conld not find that the Government ever was paid a cent for transporting that freight to the North. HOUTHERN WAR CLAIMS. Henry H. Smith, who was the clerk of the Committee on War Claims of both the Forty-seoond and the Forty-third Congresses, and is now the general olerk of the House, has, after a carefnl exami nation of the official records, made a statement of the exaot facts in regard to the Southern claims which were pre sented to the Forty-seoond, Forty-third And Forty-fourth Congresses. Of the onck hundred and forty bills which have been paraded as having been iutrodneed by Democratic Representa tives in the present Congress, it appears that one hundred and nineteen are old olaims whioh were pending before the Forty-seoond or the Forty-third Con gress, and that the greater part of these claims are exactly similar to those olaims whioh have already been paid by the Re publican Congress and by the Treasury and War Departments daring the ptfst ten years. It also appears that a large number of these olaims were introduced by Repnblioan members as well from the South as the North. Petitiens were presented by Mr. HLalnb and other mem bers from Maine covering exactly the same cases. In regard to the amount involved in these claims it appears that of 9,237 oases reported to Congress by the Com missioner of Claims 4.426 were allowed to the extent of $3,172,606 42, and 4,811 were allowed to the extent of $16,919,- 986 06. If the same per centage should be eontinned to til the olaims now pend ing the amount allowed would be about $8,000,000 The docket of the House Committee on War Claims of the pres ent Congress shews that there were 1,287 cases referred to it. Of this num ber 1,031 weye pit) claims, which were pending in the J?orty-thir4 Congress, and 169 were for a rehearing. In regard to the HoXEP case, a claim for damages for the use of the battle field of Stone river, it appears that the elaim was re ported favorably and passed by the Re publican House of the Forty-third Con gress. Of the 109 oases reported favor ably b j the committee of the Forty - third Congress (Republican), the amount recommended to be paid is $5,- 88J,000; while the 52 cases which were fayorably by the committee of the FortyvfopytJj Congress,(Democratic), amount to $215,361, of which only $7L* 453 was actually passed by the Honse. The wmtory made against the Forty* fourth Congres is, therefore, utterly un fonnded, as Mr. Smith’s document clear- ly shows. Hers is richness. A Washington dis patoh to the New York Herald says: “Daring the deliberations pf the Na tional Executive Committee it has been tauntingly said that among the Repub lican speakers who so strenuously vol unteer daily to make speeches for Hayes and Wheeler, none have been found willing to go into the Southern States. This has been repeated outside, and so much fe' r end alarm manifested even here by the odL r B-“*i ere within the past veek that it has Oofue to be regard ed as almost certain death to g<s down into the forbidden districts of the South. Io this panic, however, *p ex ception has been found, and Represen tative McD.qppall, of New York, has agreed to take the stamp in Soaih Carolina, and will proceed at pnee upon his assignments. The only other op ta ble instance is that of Colqnel Shauoh ' kbs t, of Mississippi, who is canvassing the Clinton and adjoining District for Congress. The general impression pre vailing here is chat a life insurance com- j pany would not take a risk on any man’s life now going there for political pur poses from the North.” This is spe cimen of campaign literature. Ninety-two counties give Colquitt sixty thousand majority. THE STATEJLECTIOX. THB DEMOCRACY TRIUMPHANT IN GEORGIA. Haw the Tate Stoado—lndependent Candi date* ta the Field—Whe Bert Celqeitt— Trotter* I* the Camp—Cnword* in the Field. The Klee ties 1* Rlrheteod Cnanty—Official Ret to*. The following are the official returns of the election held in this county on Wednesday last, and consolidated by the managers of the election, at 12 o’clock m., yesterday : * i i iriwiii Ft Governor. | | A. B. uotqaitt... 1,7*4' 71 75 788 TO 2,134 J. Norcaom* 636] 00 00 0* 45 1 731 Ft State Sen-. | ater. I I J.T.ffi*mke. . 1,717! <3 TO I 7*l 85 69 2,080 For Member* Legislature. J. C. C. Block 1,5311 58 54 ! 56 M 51 ;1,861 Patrick Weigh.... 1,393 *9 *4 I S* 8* 31 !1,535 Wm. E. Johnston 1,558 58 63 1 56 84 52 1,882 W. A- Deant ■ 6571 13 2* j 129 35 35 j 938 •Bepnbiican. tlnde pendent. [Special Dispatches to Chronicle and Sentinel.] Waynesbobo, October 4.—The resnlt of to-day’s election so far as present re tains indicate are: Norcross, Republi can, 729 ; Colquitt, Democrat, 300 ; Democrat nominees, T. J. McElmurraj, 168; H. H. Perry, 138; W. F. Walton, 969; Independents, E. H. Perkins, 939; S. A. Corker, 1,001; J. B. Jones, not a candidate, 47. It will be seen from the above list that the independent ticket will carry the connty by a heavy majority. Not only for themselves, bnt under the direction of J. E. Bryant, the negroes voted solidly for the independ ent ticket, headed by Norcross. It will be seen that one of the Democratic candidates, Mr. Walton, was voted for by both parties. Dbmoobat. Amebicus, Ootober 4.—Americas pre cinot gave Colquitt 286 majority.— Connty will give 500 majority. Fort and Danson (Democrats) elected to Leg islature without opposition. S. D. Rogers. Coj-ybrs, October 4.—The following is the official report of the election for Governor and Representatives at the oonrt House: Town distriot of Book dale county—Colquitt, 660; Norcross, 163; W. L. Peek (Democrat), Represen tative, 488; B. F. Carr (Democrat), Rep resentative, 317. Total vote, 838 The connty precincts will go unanimously Colquitt—probably 200. Yours, &c., J. W. Obum. Washington, October 4.—This pre cinct gives Colqnitt for Governor, 420; for members of the Legislature: F. H. Colley, 418; Wm. R. Calloway, 413. Not a Radical vote polled. _ D. M. D. Wabbenton, October has carried Warren connty b*oo majority. Pilcher, Democrat, ditto. B. Woodvtlle, Ootober 4.—The follow ing is the vote at this precinct: Col quitt, Democrat, 313; Norcross, Repub lican, 26; Dresham, Democrat, 310; Branch, Democrat, 297; Smith (negro), Republican, 25. J. D. Barnett, October 4.—Election returns from Barnett preoinct : For Governor— A. H. Colquitt, 78; J. Norcross, 10; H. V. Johnson, 1. For Legislature—W. H. Pilcher, 81; Noel Johnson, oolored, 10. Geneva, October 4.—Talbotton polls for Colquitt 194, for Norcross 118; Ge neva for Colquitt 87, for Norcross 7. Athens, Ootober 4.—Election passed off perfectly harmonious. Colqnitt, 728; Norcross, 500; Carlton, 693; Jennings (Independent) 3. The negroes voted solid for Norcross, with no Representa tive. The Independents turned out mere poppycocks, and were ruthlessly swept from their roosts. Columbus, October 4.—Demooratio majority in Colnmbns, 681; in county, probably 800. D. C. Cady, Senator; R, J. Moses and N. Oatis, Representatives. Sparta, Ootober 4.— Hancock county went Demooratio by 300 majority. Thomasville, October 4. Thomas County goes Democratic by one hun dred and twenty-six majority. Ham mond and Book are elected. , Atlanta, October 4.—fcleotion quiet. Returns indioate a light vote. Demo cratic majority large. Savannah, Ootober 4.—Demooratio majority in Ohathan county, 920 ; Sum ter oounty, 500 ; Pierce connty, 180, Everything passed off quietly. Athens, October*s. —Colqnitt every where triumphant. Dr. Robert Murry, Independent, defeats Sheats, regular nominee, in Oconee oounty. Smith and Pope elected in Oglethorpe; G, R. Duke ana A. T. Bennett in Jaokson, and 9. W. Cohort in Madison. R. H. Bullock is elected Senator from the Thirtieth District. Dr. J. M. MoEntyre defeats Thomas Coymo in Franklin county. The exact vote is unknown. A. S. Darien, October 5. The result of the election in Mclntosh connty is as follows : Gen. Colquitt, 278; Norcross, 321. For Senator—Clifton, Democrat, 272; Law, negro Radical, 320. For Rep resentatives—Wm. Henry Atwood, Dem ocrat, 274; Amos R. Rogers, negro Rad ical, 246. Greene County Colqnitt, 1,493; Norcross, 610. For the Legisla ture Gresham, Democrat, 1,486; Branch, Democrat, 1,597 ; Smith, negro, 603. Greenesboro, Ootobter s.—The aver age Demooratio majority in Greene oounty will exceed nine hundred. This shows large Democratic gains. The people are jnbilaut. The election pass ed off qnie lv. Many negroes voted for Colqnitt. Very truly, H. T. Wabrenton, October s.—Demooratio majority, 376. Dr. Sorugs, Demooratio candidate of Glasoock, was elected by 30 majority over (wo other Democrats. No Radical candidate in the county. Colqnittt got nearly all the votes cast in the county—have not learned definitely the number. F. L. B. Bartow, Jefferson County, Ootober s.—The official count of election in lefferson county is: Colquitt, 840; Nor cross—one through mistake; Shewmake, 837. For Representatives—J. H. Pol hill, 704; M. A. Evan", 728; A. E. Tar ver, 114—the last Independent Candida- tea. Amebious, Ga., October 5. Webster wins the lanrels. Give her the flag. Colquitt has 350 majority. Not a Radi cal vote. Dr. W.. C. Ken'driok unani mously elected. C. W. H. Waynesboro, October 6.—The follow ing is the vote in Bnrke oonnty: Col quitt, 1,053; Norcross, 1,153; MoElmur ray, 712; Perry, 610; Corker, 2,090; Walton, 2,028; Perkins, 1,846. Viva. AmerlCUs, Ootober 6 —Schley county goes Democratic by 200 majority. N. J. Wall was elected Representative by the same majority. _ C. W. H. Taliaferro county—Colquitt, 439; Nor cross, 179; B. F. Moore, 437; Madison Moore (colored), 175. B. M. L. Atlanta, October 6.—Later returns still indicate a light vote polled. The official figures point to a probable Dem ocratic majority of seventy-five thous and. Oalethorpe County. ’Lexington, October s.—Please find below the vote of Oglethorpe county : For Governor—A. H. Colquitt, Demo crat, 869; J. Norcross, Radical, 286; Colqnitt’s majority, 583. For Senator — Richard H. Bullock, Democrat, 929 (no opposition). For Representatives—A. F. Pope, Demoorat, 784; James M. Smith, Demoorat, 891; J. F. Cunningham, Radical Independent, SB9; Smith and Pope, Democrats, elected. Jackson Canity. Jefferson, Ga., October s. —The fol lowing shows the result of the election in Jackson county yesterday : For Governor—A. H. Colquitt recieved 1 1681 Norcross, 367. For Representa tives— O. R. Duke received 936; A. T. Bennett, 907; 4- G. Justice, 637; J. M. Potts, 388; J. B. Silman, 374; Robert White, 219. 411 ihe candidates tor Representatives were independent Demo crats—there being no nominees. Columbia County, For Governor— Colquitt, 268; Nor oross, 1. Representative—JosephP. Will iams, 246. Linaoia County. Lxncolnton, October 4.—Linoolnton Precinct, for Governor -A. H. Colqaitt, 123 votes. Bepresentive—l. L. Wilkes, 109 votes. Foar boxes to hear from. Emanuel Couafy. Midyille, Ootober ft—J give yon a correct statement of the vote in JSmanuel county on Wednesday last : Governor— Colquitt, mi Norcross, 178. Senator— McLeod, 647; Lane, 491- Rapreeenta tive-MoGar, 598; Brinson, 4W. (j. i). o. Bnrke County. Colquitt, 1,035; Norcross, 1,357; Cork er, 2,022: Perkins, 1,813; Walton, 2,- 090; McElmurry, 712; Perry, 608; scatter the precincts except o**. fU* the Vote; Colquitt, 46; Norcross, H>*, Corker. 14* Ferkjns- 134; McElmnrry, 15; Periy, 1 6; ' ' p - Oconee County. Athens, October 6-Oconee gives® Mnreg, independent, 140 and Colquitt 122 majority. j.atajm^ynty. Colquitt, 90{i majority. art c**",?’ Elects Reason five to one over fade penden£ando*to*PU bn * against Colquitt, Tarnqr W Moon. WaaUaotau County. j Sanpersvillr, October ft— The fol lowing me the county, except one JWW • 1, 628; Norcross, 931. For Senator— Forman, Democrat, 1,694; Brucuage. independent, 856. Representatives— Jones, Democrat, 973; Wicker; Dem ocrat, 1,041; Robson, Independent, 1,584 ; Peacock, Independent, 1,444. The General Resnlt. Atlanta, October 6.—Forty counties, official, give Colqnitt 43,924; Norcross, 13,797. The Secretary ol State from these returns estimates Colquitt’s ma jority at not less than 100,000. C. W. S. Jasper County. Monticello, October s.—Please find below resnlt of election in onr oounty (Jasper): Colqnitt received 1,101 votes; Norcross received 534 votes; Godfrey reoeived, for Senator, 1,971 votes; Stafford reoeived, for Senator, 29 votes; Key, for Repre sentative, Independent Democrat, sup ported by nearly all the negroes that voted, received 1,088 votes; Walker, nominee, received 529 votes; W. B. Acree received 5 votes. The election passed off quietly. Lincoln County. Washington, Ga., Ootober 7.—Re turns of Lincoln connty election: Col quit for Governor, 283; Wilkes for Rep resentative, 261. Hart County. Editors Chronicle and Sentinel: Habtwbll, October s.—Have not heard from all the precincts in the connty bnt am confident in asserting that Benson received five votes to one of Duncan, the Republican candidate. Colqnitt got an overwhelming majority, Norcross receiving over one hundred votes in the connty. Will send yon ac curate returns as soon as reoeived. o. w. s. The Majority. Atlanta, October 7. —The Democratic majority in ninety-two counties is sixty thousand. Forty-five counties to hear from will make the majority eighty thousand at least. The Legislature— the Senate stands 43 Democrats and one Republican. The House is all Demo crats except six Republicans; including three colored. THB COURSE OF COTTON. Weekly Review *f the New Yerk Market. [A. 7. Daily Bulletin. J We have had a more decided market daring the period covered by '.he present review than for many weeks past, and the gain has been largely in favor of the baying interest. In a nut-shell, the cause is “ too many bales.” The receipts at the ports have been free ; the st tistical position at the interior towns indicated a steady movement of the orop into market, for the present at least; the yellow fever has evidently spent its force both as an epedemio aad an influence likely to seriously reta rd the handling of cotton, and everybody who hns had any stock has been anxious to sell, while the offsetting outlet luis really proven insignifieant |as compared with the amonnts available. There fore, whatever future developments m aj' show in regard to the condition and la tent of the cri p, there has certainly of late been a great deal more cotton available than conld be ns : d, and its weight has carried prices down along the line. Among the local points con tributing to the same result may be noted the material redaction of the short interest on last week’s flurry to oover, including the great body of the light skirmishers, and leaving the “ bears” principally large operators, who have throughout the entire season refused to scare worth a farthing, and accept the decline as simply a matter of course endorsement of the views they had entertained from the outset, to be followed, they claim, by a still further shrinkage. An utter failure of anything like even a small twist on September was also disappointing, and the month went ont in a mild, stnpid manner, with the ootton going begging, and free of ferings on October short notices. Liv erpool has evidently been vacillating, bnt private advices indioate the under tone of weakness of a natural character, with the political situation in Enrope is also such as to cause some fears of ad verse offset upon business. At the close, on the geaeral market sellers ap peared to outnumber buyers, and the outlook was not very encouraging for any positive reaction. Spots have been only moderately ac tive and altogether in much less encour aging condition than last week, with prices Jo. lower and 'not strong at the decline. The outlet offered continued almost exclusively on home aeconnt, and the call was direoted mainly to parcels and assortments only to be found here, spinners gradually transferring their or ders to the Southern markets, where margins on the new crop are more ac ceptable and the opportunity for selec tion better. Exporters have followed the same plan, though the latter class of operators do not appear to be in a re markably anxious mood to take hold as yet, and claim to have only a small and unsatisfactory margin. Our holders have little or no use for their supplies on speculative account, and with new stock pressing upon them in greater vol ume daily, were differing pretty freely at all times, were quite ready to accept dnrrent quotations on accumulations in store, and to make a reasonable shading on landing parcels, with now and then pretty low offers of cotton to arrive. For future delivery there has been some fluctuations, but the general ten dency has been downward, under influ ences as set forth more fully above. The temporary cheeks to the decline were in the main clue to the call to oover among the operators who work for small profits and secure them whenever accrued, and there has probably been very few pur chases for investment, orders on this side proving quite soarce. Early in the week near-by options were held pretty stiffly, but September olosed quietly, and the resnlt was to make dose de liveries the weakest. The first break <io curred at the opening, Monday’s market going off about Jc. and closing withoht much tone, the “bulls” appearing to have suddenly lost faith. On Tuesday the downward turn continued, with nearly Jo. more added to the decline. On Wednesday some of the smaller ope rators thought best to take in their profit, and this gave more tone and a re action of l-160. During Thursday, how ever, this was all lost and the market olosed weak, to be followed on Friday by a decline of 3-32 c., afterwards partial ly recovered, and a little more steadiness at the close. Satu day, however, was again week, with l-32a1-16c. off, and the market finally wound np with few ap pearances of strength. WARREN COUNTY. The Courts—Tbe Election. [ilpeeiai Correspondence Chronicle and Sentinel.] Warrenton, October 6, 1876.—The Warren Court has been in session the past week, Judge Pottle presiding. The visiting members of the bar were Col. Mathews, of Oglethorpe; Judge W. M. and M. P. Reese, of Wilkes; Cols. Tutt, Hudson and Casey, of McDuffie; Hon. Seaborn Reese and Col. Dußose, of Hancock; Gen. Dnßose, of Wilkes; and J. L. Battle, Esq., of Glasscock. The business of. the Court was vigorously prosecuted, and I suppose resulted in a clearance oi the dockets of all cases of importance. Owing to the favorable weather for picking cotton scarcely any of the country people have been in at tendance, except those compelled by business in the Court, A large orowd of colored people were in town on the day of the election, but very few whites, the latter voting at pre cincts in the conntry. I have rarely witnessed a more qniet and orderly elec tion, not a drunken white man on the ground, and only two or three negroes, and they not at all boisterous. The harmony and good feeling which prevails amoDg the races, and the ex pressed determination of all classes to do their duty, sugars a better state of things for the fature. More corn, peas, potatoes, wheat and oats have been raised this year than for several years past, apd the planters say they intend sowing every spare acre in small grain the present season and get at it as soon possible. A great many will raise meat enongh to do them another year, and there is a growing interest upon the subject ofj increasing and improving the stock of hogs. The people are gradual ly merging from their indebtedness, are perfectly sore of this evil, conscious of the curse and alive to the remedy. Although money matters are extremely tight, all arp in good spirits and confi dent of a better day in the future. VITK)B. new YQR* NEWS* Foreign GoliWThr Celeron Etpetfeu-Ter rfble Accident, New York, Ootober 7.—Seventy thou sand pounds of gold coin and Russian coin was received at the United States assay office to-day. making a total of two hundred and thirty thousand pounds to date. Four hundred and fifty thousand dollars of American gold coin was recced at the United States Treasury last night from Europe. AbotfePi' 4iPStch were received at the National pl©C<*s4* headquarters to day from Denver clkiiewg G&lv?£?° b 7 five hundred majority. . , The German bark Europe, having side? caulked at the dock, took fire. A quantity of took waa burned. After "fiie fire five mtt Were found in the hold smotherfed to death.' All were workmen onthe vessel, and it is supposed could t not find the way out on account of the sm<*. AH leave destitute famihes. Another pa| fatally and an other serioualj burned* THE SUPREME COURT. DBCISIONB KKJiIHiHKD OCTOBER 3, 1876. [Atlanta Constitution.] Bleckley, J., did not preside in this case on account of providential cense. Hines, administratrix, vs. Poole. Com plaint, from Decatur. Wabnbb, C. J. This was an action brought by the plaintiff against the defendant on a pro missory note, signed by the defendant as administratrix on the estate of D. P. Hines, with an averment that said note was given in payment of an amount due by the intestate and for the beoefit of his estate. On the trial of the ease the jury under the charge of the Court found a verdiot in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $566 46 principal, with interest. The defendant made a motion for anew trial on various grounds, which was overruled by the Court, and the defendant excepted. Many of the questions made by the plaintiff in error were settled when this case was before this Court on a former occasion. See 52d Qa. Rep. 500. There was no error in admitting the evidenoe of Peabody as to the sayings of King, the defendant’s general agent in the management of her intestate’s estate, the agent, King, being dead. There was no error in admitting the evidence of because as against the defendant a use of her intestate was dead. The witness was only offered to prove that the amount for which the note was given enured to the benefit of the estate and not to prove any contraot made with the intestate. In view of the evidenoe contained in the record, there was no error in the charge of the Court to the jury, or in refusing to charge as requested. Let the judgment of the Court below overruling the motion for anew trial be affirmed. Bleckley, J., did not preside in this case for providential reasons. Hampton vs. State. Larceny, from Dougherty. Wabnbb, C. J. The defendant was indicted for the offense of “simple larceny," and charged with stealing a cow of the value of fifty dollars. On the trial of the defendant the jury found him guilty. A motion was made for anew trial on the ground that the verdict was contrary to law, contrary to the evidenoe, and without evidence, which motion was overruled by the Court, and the defendant except ed. After a careful examination of the evidence in the record, it is sufficient, in our judgment, to support the verdiot, and, therefore, it is not contrary to law, nor without evidenoe. Let the judg ment of the Court below be affirmed. Bleckley, J., did not preside in this case on account of providential cause. Lift, administrator, vs. Hartwell, execu tor. Equity, from Dougherty. Wabnbb, C. J. This ease came before the Court be low for trial on an original bill filed on the equity side of the Court, and oross bills, embracing several matters in con troversy between the parties. There was a good deal of evidence introduced on both sides. The jury returned the fallowing verdiot : “ We, the jury, de cree as follows : First, That the balanoe due on the note against the estate of T. M. Nelson and the legacy in favor of T. M. Nelson be both cancelled. Seoond, That the title to the lot in dispute be vested in the estate of T. M. Nelson.” Upon this verdict the complainant’s so licitor presented a decree to the chan cellor for his signature, which he re fused to sign, on the ground, as stated in the bill of exceptions, that the ver dict was void for want of certainty.— Whereupon the plaintiff excepted. If the verdict was void for uncertainty, then it should have been set aside; but in our judgment the verdict was not void for uncertainty; its terms are quite plain and easily understood, and the chancellor should have signed a decree thereon as required by the 4212th sec tion of the Code, aDd it was error in re fusing to do so. Let the judgment of the Court below be reversed. Bleckley, J., was providentially pre vented from presiding in this case. Jones et al. vs. Bivins et al., executors. Ejectment, from Baker. Wabnbb, C. J. This was an action of ejectment pend ing in the Court below, and by agree ment of the parties, was submitted to the decision of the Court on the follow ing agreed statement of facts, to-wit : “That plaintiffs have a regular chain of title for this lot from the State of Geor gia. That in 1858 or 1859, the said ex ecutors sold this let of land to A. H. Metts for SI,OOO, one half cash, balanoe on credit until January, 1860, and he re ceived a bond for titles upon the pay ment of the balance of the purchase money. That this note for balance of purchase money was reduced to judg ment in 1861 against said Metts. That on the 29,th of December, 1868, the exe cutors of Walker made and filed in the clerk’s office a deed for this lot to Metts and had the same levied on and it was sold the last Tuesday in March, 1869, at sheriff’s sale, and purchased by them, and they received the deed of the sheriff therefor. It was agreed that Metts will testify that he made the purchase for James Bond. It is also agreed that John Jones purchased this lot of land from James Bond for a valuable consid- eration on the 2d day of November, 1860, and received his warranty deed therefor, that he then went into posses sion thereof, which has been open and continuous ever since; and John Jones will testify at the time he purchased this lot he had no notice of the bond for titles to Metts, or how James Bond de rived his title for this lot, and that he was a bona fide purchaser without no tice of this claim. It was also agreed that John| Jones sued out a rule against Jackson, sheriff of said county, and Biv ins and Walker as executors, at the May term 1869 of this Court, to set aside said sale; they filed their answers there to, which was still pending. This action of ejectment was brought on the 30th of April, 1872, against John H. Marks, who was a tenant of John Jones, who, as owner thereof, was made a party defendant November, 1872; that it was then agreed that both cases be consolidated and tried together. After argument had thereon, the Court decided' in favor of the plaintiffs in ejectment for the premises in dispute; to which said judgment the defendant excepted. The plaintiffs had the title to the land in controversy, and could have main tained their action of ejectment to re cover the possession thereof, not only as against Metts, but against Bond, and those who were in possession of the land claiming under them. It is true that they had the right to file their deed in the clerk’s office to the land, levy their execution thereon, and sell it for the purchase money due therefor, but that was merely a cumulative remedy given them by statute. When they became the purchasers of the land at sheriff’s sale, they stood in no better condition than any other purchaser would have done. * It is admitted that Jones had been in possession of the land more than seven years before the commencement of the plaintiffs’ action, but it is insisted that inasmuch as Jones sued out a rule against the sheriff and the plaintiffs, to set aside the sale as set forth in the agreement, that that defeated his pre scription title to the land. The statute declares that adverse possession of land under written evidence of title for seven years, shall give a title by pre scription. The exception is, that if such written title be forged or fraudulent, and notice thereof be bronght home to the claimant before or at the time of the commencement of his possession, no prescription can be based thereon. Code, Section 2,684. The general rule is, that when the statnte commences running it continues to run, unless prevented by someone of the ex ceptions contained therein. According to the statement of facts in the agree ment, the statute commenced ranning in favor of Jones, the defendant, from the 2d of November, 1860, that being the time of the commencement of his adverse possession. Inasmuch as the suing out of the rule by Jones against the sheriff and the plaintiffs to set aside the sale, as mentioned in the agreement, does not constitute one of the excep tions to the running of the statute, as prescribed therein, it continued to run in favor of the defendant, and he ac quired a good prescriptive title to the land in dispute, and the Court erred in ruling to the contrary thereof. This case comes within the principles ruled by this Court in Wingfield, administra tor, vs. Davis, 58d Ga. Bep. 655. See also Garnett vs. Adrian, 44th Ga. Bep. 274. Let the judgment of the Court be low be reversed. Bleckley, J., was Providentially pre vented from presiding in this case. Americas vs. Barlow, injunction, from • Sumter. Wabneb, O. J. The complainant filed his bill against the defendant, praying for an injunction to restrain it from enforcing an order requiring the complainant to remove his feppe frr% a oertaia described street in the city of imeticu*, fin the ground that the land on which the fenoe'toas located was not the property of the city but the property of the complainant.. On the hearing of the motion for the injunc tion, the evidence $s Jo whether the lend on which the fence was erected was the property of this city bt the property the complainant was conflicting.' The chancellor granted the injunction prayed for, and the defendant excepted. There | is nothing in this case to take it out of the general rule so often announced by this Court, that it will not' oontrol the discretion of the Chancellor in granting an injunction, unless that discretion has been grossly abnsed, or some well set tled principle of law or equity has been violated. Let the judgment of the Oonrt below be affirmed. Bleokley, J., was Providentially pre vented from presiding in this case. Toole vs. Perry. Complaint, from Sum ter. Wabnbb, C. J. The plaintiff sued tbe defendant on a promissory note for $1,938 54, payable to John Williams or bearer, dated 7th June, 1871, and due Ist July next there after. The defendant filed an equitable plea to the plaintiff’s action, in which he alleged, in substanoe, that in the year 1869 he purchased a plantation in Cal houn county of said Williams for the price of $15,180, and gave to him there for bis two notes, each for the sum of $7,590, one due Ist January, 1870, the other due Ist January, 1871. Defendant paid on the note first due the sum of $5,000, leaving due thereon $2,590; that before the payment of the balanoe of the money due for said land, Hoyle, assignee of one Baldwin, had filed his. bill in the Fifth Circuit Court of the United States against said Baldwin and Williams, al leging that said lands had been pur chased by said Williams, of said Bald win to defraud the creditors of Baldwin, and praying that the same might be de creed to be assets in the hands of sadd as signee to pay the creditors of Baldwin, that at the time the $5,000 was paid Williams agreed with defendant that he would not demand any further payment of the amount due from defendant for the land until the termination of the litigation in said United States Circuit Court, and that the said five thousand dollars was paid upon this agreement, and in consequence thereof, that some time after said payment was made said Williams turned over to the plaintiff, Perry, the note on which said payment was made as collateral security to se cure a debt which Williams owed him; that afterwards, at the special instance and request of Perry and Williams, de fendant agreed to and did divide the amount due on said note into two sums, and on the 7th of June, 1871, gave to Williams his two notes—one for $1,9j)8.- 54, due July Ist, 1871, not as a renewal of the other note, but for the accommo dation of said Perry and WiUiams, that Perry knew all the eonditionsjond agree- ments respecting the payment' of $5,- 000, and that no payment was to be de manded of defendant upon the balance due upon the $7,590 note and that the note for $1,938 64 was given by defend ant and reoeived by said Williams upon the same terms, and subject to the Bame agreements and conditions which at tached to the balance due on the $7,- 590 note; that Williams is insolvent and has no estate with whioh to answer de fendant if he should be compelled to pay said note now sued on’by the plain tiff; wherefore the defendant praying the Court to enjoin the plaintiff from the further prosecution of said suit, and that he may have suoh. relief in the premises as may be considered meet and proper. On the trial of the oase the jury found a verdiot in favor of the plaintiff for the full amount of the note sued on. It appears from the record and bill of exceptions that after the de fendant had closed his evidence (which is set forth in the record), the Court, on motion of the plaintiff, ordered the defendant’s equitable plea to be strick en, on the ground that the defendant had dosed without evidenoe to sustain it—the defendant making no objection as to the time when the motion to dis miss was made. To this order of the Court dismissing the plea the defend ant excepted. Assuming that the Court erred in dis missing the defendant’s plea under the facts and circumstances of the case, as set forth in the record and bill of ex ceptions, how is the defendant hurt by that error ? The bill of exceptions states that the defendant’s equitable plea was dismissed on the grounds stated in the order are that the equita ble plea was insufficient, and that the defendant had dosed his oase without evidence to sustain it. The defendant had the benefit of his plea to introduce all the evidence he could to sustain it, and that evidence, as disclosed in the re cord, did not sustain it; and whilst that may not have been a good legal reason for dismissing the defendant’s plea after allowing him to introduce all the evi dence he could under it, nevertheless it is a good reason why the plaintiff’s ver dict should not be set aside. The de fendant had the full benefit of his equi table plea on the trial of the case, and was allowed to introduce all the evidence he could under it before it was stricken. The trouble with the defendant at the trial was that he did not have the evi dence to sustain his equitable plea so as to prevent the plaintiff from obtaining a verdict upon his evidence. Inasmuch as the defendant was not hurt by the.stri king of his plea after he had introduced all the evidence he could under it, and that evidence, as disclosed in the record, not being sufficient to defeat the plain tiff’s recovery, on his evidenoe, the ver diot should not be set aside for the al leged error in striking the defendant’s plea after he had introduced all the evi dence he could under it, but whioh fail- ed to sustain it. There is no pretense or complaint that tbe verdiot is contrary to the evidenoe or without evidenoe to support it. The only complaint is that the Court erred in striking the defend ant’s equitable plea under tbe faots and oircumstAnoes as set forth in the reoord. We are not to be considered as holding in this case, even by implication, that a common law Court in this State has ju risdiction to decree by the verdiot of a jury a temporary injunction as prayed for in the defendant’s equitable plea. As the defendant in error did not olaim damages for delay in bringing the oase up to this Court, we do not award any. Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed. Bleckley, J., was providentially pre vented from presiding in this oase. Goodwin et. al. vs. Crowell. Complaint, from Sumter. Wabneb, O. J. The plaintiff bronght his action against tbe defendants on a promissory note for $334 80. The defendants plead ed that the note was given to settle and prevent a criminal prosecution against Goodwin, who was the principal maker of the note. On the trial of the case, the jury, nnder the oharge of the Court, found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff. The defendants made a motion fora new trial, on the grounds therein set forth, which was overruled by the Court, anil defendants excepted. It appears, from the evidence in the record, - that Good win was the agent of the Imperial Life Insurance Company, at Americns, of which the plaintiff is now the resident manager; that he bad, as Soch agent, collected the amount for which the note was given for said company in the way of premiums; that in the Winter of 1871 the plaintiff demanded of him by letter said sum of money so due, and that he failed to pay it, and the books of the plaintiff were taken out of his hands. A few days before the note was given, Hancock, the agent of the plaintiff, told Goodwin that be would give him a short time to pay what he owed the oompany or give him a note with good security for the payment thereof, and if he failed to pay it, he (the agent) would prosecute him on the criminal side of the Court; that if he paid said money, or gave said i ote, the oompany would not prosecute him; that his intention in giving said note was to keep from being prosecuted, and he waa not prosecuted after giving the note. The amount of the note is the same amount demanded of him by the oompany. The Court charged the jury amongst other things, “the fact that the agent of the oompany threatened Goodwin with a criminal prosecution, does not discharge the defendant, Goodwin, nor liis securi ties, provided Goodwin owed the oom pany the amount of the note. If the consideration of the note was the com promising or settling a criminal prose cution, and Goodwin did not owe the defendant the plaintiff cannot recover, but if he did owe the debt, and this note was given to secure its payment, he ia entitled to recover whether he was threatened with a criminal prosecution or not, or whether he agreed to settle the prosecution or not.” This charge of the Court, in view of the evidence in the record, was error. The Question for the jury to deoide, was whether the note was given for what Goodwin owed the company, or whether it was given to settle the criminal prosecution with which he was threatened under the pe nal laws of the State. Code 8054, 8055. If the note was given for what Goodwin owed the company, then the plaintiff was entitled to recover. If the note waa given to suppress a criminal prosecu tion amounting to A felony nnder the penal laws of . the State, then the plain tiff was not entitled to recover, and the Court should have so charged the jury. The charge as given waa calculated to confuse and mislead the jury as to the real issue involved on the trial of the case. Let the judgment of the Court below be reversed „ Hawkins vs. Smith, .trustee. Complaint, ffom Sumter. Warner, C. J. This was am action bronght by the plaintiff against, thetfefgndaut-as ’an at torney at law, to recover asnm of money alleged to have been collected by him, and hp nafuaed. to pay to the plaintiff when demanded. The defend ant pleaded that the plaintiff ought not to maintain his action against him, be cause the whole matter bad been settled and determined by a judgement of the Superior Court of Sumter county, upon a rule nisi embracing the same subject matter. On the trial of the case, the jury, under the oharge of the Court, found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff for S2OO 00 with interest at 7 per cent, from the sth of April, 1869, up to the 15th of April, 1874, and twenty per cent, thereon after demand of payment. It appears from the evidence in the record that the defendant collected on a mort gage placed in his hands for collection, the sum of nine hundred dollars at one time for one portion of property embrac ed in the mortgage, and that he reoeived at another time S2OO from Elam for an- other portion of the property embraced in the mortgage. The controversy be tween the parties in this suit was in re lation to the S2OO received from Elam. When the defendant was ruled for the money which he had col lected, the original rule appears to have been amended so as to inolude the money received by the defendant from Elam. The defendant in his answer to the amended rule ad mitted the reoeipt of S9OO for the mort gaged property sold to Joiner for the plaintiff, but insisted that he received the money from Elam in his own right, and not as the attorney for any person. There appears to have been a rule abso lute granted against the defendant for the sum of S9OO about whioh there was no controversy at the trial of this case. The plaintiff demurred to the de fendant’s amended answer, whioh was overruled, the Court holding it to be sufficient to protect the defendant from the payment of the money alleged to have been received by him from Elam. Then the following agreement' appears to have bee > executed, whioh was of fered and read in evidence by the plain tiff: J. Smith, trustee, vs. B, F. Marshall. Rule against W. A. Hawkins, attorney at law. The rule in the above stated oase having been dismissed by the Court without being traversed, and there being no further proceedings had in said rule case, I hereby waive all ad vantages (if any) whioh arisen, or may arise, in favor of myself by reason of the said proceedings, as against any suit at law which may be hereafter in stituted upon the same cause of action in Sumter Superior Court, but will in sist that I am not liable, originally, to any greater extent than was adjudged by said proceedings. [Signed] W. A. Hawkins. The plaintiff offered in evidence the mortgage and the reoeipt of the defend ant to Elam for S2OO, whioh was signed by him as attorney. Tbe plaintiff intro duced the defendant as a witness, who stated, amongst other things, “that un til his memory was refreshed by looking at the transfers and receipt, he thought that he had sold the whole interest to Joiner, and that % he received the S2OO from Elam as his own individual money, and not as the money of the plaintiff. The defendant introduced in evidence the rule nisi, answer and judgment of the Court making the rule absolute against him for S9OO, whioh it was agreed he had paid. Smith testified that he considered the rule on whioh the order was passed anew rule and not an amendment. In rebuttal the plain tiff proved by Guerry that the rule on whioh the judgment was passed was an amendment of the first rule, and not a new rule. The defendant in his general answer recognizes the rule as an amend ed rule when he says, “In answer to tbe rule as amended respondent says, etc.” The plaintiff”also proved a de mand .of the defendant in writing to pay the money collected by him to his at torney, or in default thereof that twenty per cent per annum would be required. The defendant requested the Court to charge the jury “if defendant in good faith refused to pay the money on de mand of the plaintiff, believing that he .was not liable for the amount or any part thereof, the jury may find only law ful interest, and are not compelled to find twenty per oent. from the time of the demand on the two hundred dol lars,” which oharge the Court refused to give, but did oharge the jury as follows: “So far as the claim for tbe corner lot known as the Handy lot was concerned the judgment on the rule against Col. Hawkins was a bar to any further pro ceeding on that aooonnt. The plain tiff having obtained a rule abso lute against Colonel Hawkins on that olaim, could not reoover for the same demand in an aotion at law. If the Elam lot was not a subject matter vof the rule, then the rule absolute as to the money collected on account of that lot, could not be plead in bar of this action. If Col. Hawkins received two hundred dollars on the Elam lot, he is responsi ble for that amount with legal interest up to the notice, and twenty per cent, after tbe notice.” The refusal to oharge as requested, and to the charge as given, the defendant exoepted, and assigns the same as error. In our judgment, there was no error in the oharge as given, or in the refusal to oharge as requested, in view of the evidence contained in the record. From an inspection of the re cord and proceedings had as to the rule absolute for the S9OO, it is quite dear, we think, that the S2OO received from Elam, whioh is the subject matter of the present suit, was not included in that judgment. The record shows that the original rule was amended so as to re quire the defendant to show cause why he should not pay to the plaintiff the money reoeived from Elam. The defend ant answered the rule as amended , ad mitted the receipt of the S2OO from Elam, but stated “that he reoeived the same in his own right and not as the attorney of anybody. ’’This amended answer of the de fendant was not traversed, and upon that amended answer the Court held he was not liable to be ruled as an attorney at law of the plaintiff for the S2OO re oeived from Elam. The plaintiff did not trave.se the defendants answer as to the S2OO reoeived from Elam, having al ready taken a rule absolute against him for the S9OO received from joiner, and it is, therefore, in view of these facts that the defendants’ written agreement herein before set forth beoomes con spicuously significant as to tbe merits of the present suit for the S2OO received from Elam. It is true that in thatagree ment the defendant reserved the right to insist in this suit that he was not origi nally liable to any greater extent than S9OO, the amount for whioh the rule ab solute had been granted against him for the money collected from Joiner. The question that remained to be tried in the present suit, was whether the de fendant was originally liable to the plaintiff for money received on the mort gage to any greater extent than the S9OO received from Joiner, and for which the rule absolute had been granted. The jury, under the evidence, have found by their verdict that the defendant was originally liable to the plaintiff to a greater extent than S9OO, to-wit: the S2OO received from Elam, and faat tnis latter amount was not in cluded in the judgment for S9OO. The demand for the money in the hands of the defendant was made in pursuance of the provisions of the 3950th section of the Code, which makes an attorney at law liable to pay at the rate of twenty per cent, per annum for money in his hands, collected by him for his clients, from the date of the de mand “unless good cause be shown to the contrary.” The request to charge was not in the language of tbe Code. The request was, “If the defendant in good faith refused to pay the money on demand of the plaintiff, believiog that he was not liable for the amount, or any part thereof, the jury may find only law ful interest, and are not compelled to find twenty per cent, from the time of the demand on tbe two hundred dollars.” The statute is imperative, and declares that the attorney at law s/tall be com pelled to pay at the rate of twenty per cent, per annum from the date of the demand, unless good cause be shown to the contrary. What is the good cause attempted to be shown in this case? It is trne that Col. Hawkins, the plaintiff’s attorney, etatea that until bis memory was refreshed by looking at the transfer of the property and his own receipt for tbe money, that he thought that the S2OO 00 received by him from Elam was his own individual money and not the money of the plaintiff, his client.— However honest. Col. Hawkins may have been in his opinion, and we are bound to take his statement as trne, still, that was not, in our judgment, such good cause, as contemplated by the statute, which will protect him from the payment of the twenty per cent to the plaintiff. It will not do to hold that when an attorney at law col lects money for his olient, and that money is demanded of him under the statute, asd be refuses to pay it, that he can proteot himself wheu ruled or sued for the money, from paying the twenty per eent. thereon, as the statute prescribes, because, in his opinion, or in his thoughts, the money was his in- dividual money, and not tbe money of his olient however honest his opinion or thoughts may have been. In relation to the point suggested on the argument here that the plaintiff in the mortgage was only entitled to tfle principal sum due on the mortgage and could only collect that amount from his attorney ; although he may have collected a larger amount, the certificate of the presiding judge to the bill of exceptions states that no such point was made as to the title of the plaintiff at the trial in the Court below, and as a matter of course no such question was decided there whioh this Court pan review, There was no motion f<*r anew trial in this case, no oomplaSnt that the yerdioj waa contrary to the evidence or without evi dence to support it, and if there had been, the result would have been all tbe same on the statement of facts contain ed in the record. Let the judgment of the Court below be affirmed. Mayo vs. Walden. Equity, from Lee. Wabnbb, C. J. This was a bill filed by tbe complain ant against the defendant for an account and settlement. On the trial of the case, the jury found a verdiot in favor of the complainant for the sum of S9OO. The defendant made a motion for anew trial on the various grounds therein set forth, whioh was overruled by the Court, and the defendant exoepted. In relation to the grounds taken in the motion that the complainant’s coun sel unfairly represented the testimony, and drew erroneous conclusions there from in his argument of tbe oase to the jury, we oan only say that if tbe com plainant’s counsel was guilty of any im proper conduct unbecoming an attorney and counsellor at law, or solicitor, in the management or argument of the oase in Court, and, especially, as to the alleged irregularities oomplained of, it was tbe duty of the opposing oounsel then and there to have called the atten tion of the Court to suoh irregularity or improper conduct, and have obtained the judgement of tbe Court thereof. Until the matter had been brought to the attention of the Court below, and a judgment rendered thereon, there iB nothing here for this Court to review in oonneotion with the alleged misconduct of the complainant’s solicitor in the ar gument of the oase. This Court has no original jurisdiction to oontrol the con duct of attorneys and solicitors in thb argument of cases in the Superior Courts, or any other, exoept its own Court. In looking in the record in this oase we find no error in overruling tha motion for anew trial. There is suf ficient evidenoe in the record to support the verdict, and we will not disturb it. Let the judgment and! the Court below be affirmed. Gandy, trustee, vs. Babbitt and Tonge, administrators. Complaint, from De oatur. Bleckley, J. 1. When a trustee, as suoh, has given his promissory note for the debt, and the note is declared upon the Bame is admissible iu evidenoe. 2. But the note itself is not sufficient to warrant a re covery against the trust estate. The plaintiff must go further and establish his whole declaration, proving the ex istence of a trust estate, of what it con sists, and the specific facts whioh render it liable for the debt. This he must do if there be no plea but the general issue, or even if there be no plea at all. Judg ment reversed. Minor vs. The State. Simple larceny, from Dougherty. Bleokley, J. 1. When there was no evidenoe that the prisoner instructed another when and how to steal, it was error to oharge that so doing, with other enumerated acts, would render him a principal in the larceny. 2. Open and publio use of stolen property, and a truthful answer as to how some of it was disposed of, while prima facie evidenoe of innocenoe may be intended to disguise guilt, and it is not error to submit the true con struction of such conduot to the jury in the light of all the evidenoe. 8. When, without any reason apparent from the reoord, the corpus delicti is less fully established than might be expected, this Court will the more readily grant anew trial for error in the oharge of the Court. Judgment reversed. Moughon vs. The State. Assault with intent to murder, from Dougherty. Bleckley, J. 1. The opinion of a witness expe rienced in the use of guns, as to the length of time since a gun was fired off, is admissible evidence in connection with the faots on whioh it is founded. 2. That the shot found (next day after tbe shooting) in one barrel of tbe prisoner’s gun, the other being empty, were com pared with those which lodged in and about the person assaulted, and were like them is admissible evidence. 3. That a person other than the prisoner has admitted that he did tbe shooting in Question, is not admissible evidenoe. . It is sufficient that the facts connect ing the prisoner with the offense be proved beyond a reasonable doubt, whether by positive or other testimony. It is not a rule of law that there must be no doubt about the faots. 5. 'Direct and circumstantial evidenoe are the same in effect when they equal ly convince the mind, and either kind of evidenoe is sufficient to establish a fact or to warraut a conclusion. But circumstances may point to a conclusion, and yet too slight to justify its adoption. 6 The Court need not further define circumstantial evidence than by reading to the jury seotion 3,747 of the Code. 7. When an unfriendly interview with the prisoner is proper matter of evi dence, his manner during the interview, and that it was unusual, may be proven as part of the res gestae. 8. The cir cumstances of the prisoner’s arrest il lustrated no issue in the present oase; and the testimony of the prosecutor that he had him arrested on suspicion, was not admissible. 9. A proposition whioh directs the jury to weigh the evidence with oaution and deliberation, and not to infer guilt unless it is established be yond a reasonable doubt, is not the equivalent of a previous proposition whioh states tbe question to be, whether the circumstances in evidenoe are suffi cient to satisfy the jury beyond a rea sonable doubt that the prisoner commit ted the crime, not whether it is more probable that he committed it than any other person. 10. In giving to the jury as law what has been reduoed to writing by counsel in a request to charge, it is not error for the Court to add oral com ments, where no request is made to give the whole oharge in writing, and where tbe comments added are pertinent and correct. Judgment reversed. Lewis vs. Armstrong, administrator. In equity, from Sumter. Bleckley, J. The general oountenanoe of a oase, taken as a whole, may justify the grant of anew trial, though no one feature be especially defeoted or distorted. Th# discretion of the presiding Judge in granting a first new trial is very ample. Judgment affirmed. Davis vs. Beid et al. Buie, from Baker. BrjEOKLET, J. 1. X hen the sheriff is ruled for not levying upon the defendant’s property, end for returning the ft fa. nulla bona, an answer that he conld find no prop erty belonging to the defendant upon which to levy, and that therefore he made the return, is sufficient in sub stance. 2. If the answer be defective in not responding to specific allegations in the rule, touching possession of cer tain property by the defendant in ft. fa., the objection is matter for special not general, demurrer. Judgment reversed. Bleckley, J. was providentially pre vented from presiding in this oase. Gus Billingslea vs. The State. Burglary in the night, from Baker. Jackson, J. 1. When stolen meat was found at de fendant’s house, and he told repeated and oontradiotory lies, about it, aud when tracks the size of defendant’s were found at the smoke honse, with two smaller tracks answering to the defend ants’ sons, and when the tracks found had a peculiar mark, and defendant’s boots had the same mark and the de fendant lived within a mile and a half of the smoke honse which was broken open and from whioh the meat was stolen, and the same track was traoed to within three hundred yards of the defendant’s house, and lost there in broom sedge in the direotion of his house, and some of the stolen meat was also found at the honse of defendant’s son-in-law, and the meat was olearly identified as that stolen, and tbe dis covery was made in the morning, and tbe smoke house was in. tbe owner’s yard, within the curtilage of bis house, and the law was fairly given in oharge to the jury and no complaint made about it at all: Held, That the evidence is suffi cient to authorize a oonvietion of bur glary in the night, although other cir cumstances pointed to another as con nected with the burglary, especially when other tracks were found about the garden gate, and three poles for prizing were found where the logs had been prized up, and the proof was that one man by himself conld not have broken and entered by each prizing. Judgment affirmed. INCENDIARY FIRE. Residence at South Edlnto Burned—. Narrow Escape. [Special Dispatch to the Chronicle and Sentinel.} Aiken, 8. 0., October 7.—The resi dence of L. B. Lewis, at South Edisto, twenty-four miles from Aikeu, was de stroyed by fire last night abont ten o’clock. Mr. Lewis and family barely escaped with their lives, having to run out in their night olothee and are now dependent upon friends for a shelter. Lobs, $1,200. The fire was evidently incendiary as threats had been made againgt him. B. B. B. General McLtwi. Washington, October 7. —The Presi dent to-day appointed Lafayette Mo- Laws Postmaster at Augusta; Ga., vice Ohas. H. Prinoe, suspended. The pre vious appointment of MeLaws, aa Post master at Savannah, is revoked, and Clark continued.
