Newspaper Page Text
%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.