Newspaper Page Text
SYpoiticie attft
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1877.
DEMOCRATIC CONVENTION NINTH CON
GRIUMIONAL DISTRICT.
Barrsttstille, Ga., February 10, 1877.
I hereby notify the Democratic parly
of the Ninth Congressional District,
and the committee men of the different
counties in the District, to hold their
primary meetings or elections, for the
purpose of sending delegates to the
Democratic Convention, to be held in
Gainesville, on Wednesday, the 28th
day of February, 1877, to nominate a
candidate for Congress, to fill the va
cancy caused by the reeignation of Hon.
B. H. Hill. Desiring the true expres
sion of the District, a full delegation,
either in person or by proxy, is earnest
ly requested. John Hcchsmu 11,
Chairman Dem. Ex. Com. 9th Con
gressional District _____
THE HECOND NTATE COST.
The Democrats have played and lost
their second trump. The Electoral
Commission, following the rule estab
lished in the Florida case, have declined
to admit any evidence showing that the
Hates and Wheeler electors in Lou
isiana were not legally chosen and have
decided that the eight votes of the State
shall be cast for the candidates of the
Republican party. This decision was
reached by a strict party vote—eight
Republicans to seven Democrats. The
Commission voted throughout not as
Judges, but as partisans. There was
not a break in the party lines at any
stage of the proceedings. The Demo
crats submitted eight or nine proposi
tions ; each one was rejected by a vote
of eight Republicans to seven Demo
crats. The Republicans submitted two
resolutions : First, that the testimony
be not received, and, second, that the
vote of Louisiana be cast for Hates and
WhudiEß ; they were both adopted by a
vote of eight Republicans to seven
Democrats. It is evident from what has
transpired in the determination of the
Florida and the Louisiana one that the
scheme of the Commission has failed,
The manifest intention of the committee
which framed the bill, of the Congress
which adopted and of the country
which approved was to secure a tribu
nal that would not be entirely under the
sway of partisan feeling, that would
have an element in it capable of rising
above party. Nothing was expected
from the members of the Commission
appointed by Congress but that they
should vote upon all questions in ac
cordance not with the rights of the case,
but in accordance with their political
convictions. The five Democrats and
five Republicans were intended to
neutralize each other. But something
different was expected of that element in
the composition of the Commission that
was taken from the Bench of the Su
preme Court of the United States. It
was believed that the Judges would not
be either Democrats or Republicans, but
Judges who would weigh well the merits
of the cases before them, and decide
them in obedience to the dictates of
oenscienoe. This expectation has not
been realized. Up to this time the
Judges have been equally as partisan as
the Senators and Representatives who
ait beside them. The two Democratic
Judges have voted with the Democrats;
the three Republican Judgei have voted
with the Republicans; and two States
bave been given to Hayes by two strict
party votes. Of course if the members
of the tribunal continue to vote in the
same way, the third and last State will
be given to the Republican candidate as
oertainly as three are more than two, or
that the sum of 5 plus 3 is greater than the
sum of 5 plus 2. But we confess that we
bave not lost all hope. We still think
that Mr. Tildkn will be given one vote
from Oregon, or that the vote will be re
jected altogether, and the election be
thrown into the House of Representa
tives, where the Democrats have a de
cided majority. We do not think that
the grounds of the decision in the
Louisiana case will cover the Oregon
oase. We do not see how the eight
members of the Commission who have
voted so persistently in the cases of
Louisiana and Florida that the Com
mission cannot go behind the face of
the certificates, will, in the case of
Oregon vote, that it can. The strong
way in whioh they have committed
themselves to this doctrine is the best
guarantee offered that they cannot de
cide adversely to Mr. Tilden's claim on
the vote oast by Cronin in the Electoral
College of Oregon.
The bill to grant State aid to the Ma
rietta and North Georgia Railroad was
killed in the House yesterday, a motion
to indefinitely postpone being carried
by a majority of five votes. This dis
poses C* the bill for the session.
In defeating the bill to reimburse
Messrs. Bbanch and Herrino for moneys
expended on the plighu’d faith of the
State, the House of Representatives
simply refused to perform an act of
simple justice and to pay a just debi .?<'
the State.
Many ohanges occur in the space of
seventeen years. The elegant home
whioh Vioe-President Breokinbidoe
owned in Washington City in 1861 is
now the property and residence of a col
ored man, Alfred Lee, a dealer in horse
feed.
We suggest to the croakers, now so
numerous, to cease their croakings until
the final verdict is rendered. When the
votes of Louisiana and Oregon have
been counted for Hates and Wheeler
it will be time enough to strike up the
doleful I-told-you-so chorus.
Governor CoLqurrr made a queer
mistake recently. lutending to appoint
Mr. R. W. H. Neal, Judge of the County
Court of McDuffie, the names were oon
fused and he appointed Mr. Jas. B.
Neal instead. The error was soon dis
covered and corrected.
Prominent Democrats assert there
will be no factions opposition by the
House to the decision of the Commis
sion. If the Eight say “Hayes,” Hayes
it shall be. The Cincinnati Enquirer
will please make a note of the fact that
all the prominent Democrats have been
* ‘bribed.”
By a vote of eight to seven—eight Re
publicans to seven Democrats—the Elec
toral Commission has decided that no
evidenoe can be reoeived in the case of
Louisiana, except the certificates. This
virtually gives the State to Hates, and
the Democrats have lost their second
trump. The fate of the battle now turns
upon Oregon.
Mb. Morrison, of St. Louis, a brother
of the Chairman of the Ways and
Means Committee, telegraphed to the
latter that many of the best lawyers be
lteyed the Florida decision was sound
and tut it would not impair Mr. Tildes’s
i n Jjouisiana, which was sure of
suecess. Tbt.' Congressman replied by
telegraph: “Thai all Ter Y wel, ‘ bnt
when the seven-spot bea * tbe e *B b *
I shall feel a great deal ntO e hopeful.
The Cincinnati Enquirer said Jhe de
oision in the Florida case was a of
seven-up where the Republicans turned
a jack. Was his name Bradley ?
JbENATOR Bayard will not be made a
party to fraud or bad faith. He says the
Republicans “may defeat ns, but they
can’t disgrace us. They may bring ns
into misfortune, but they can’t briDg us
into contempt.” These are the noble
words of a noble man. We do not be
lieve there are half a dozen Democrats
in Congress who would sanction an act
of bad faith. They voted for the Com
mission, knowing exactly what they were
doing, and honor and sound policy alike
demand that they shall accept and abide
by the decision. Do unto others as yon
would have others do unto yon, is a
golden rale in polities as well as in
morals.
FLU.HAN AND THE RADICALS
The process is very simple by which
a Radical Saint is turned into a scoun
drel. He has only to adroit that the
Radicals are in the wrong upon any ques
tion and he forthwith falls from grace
forever. Furman, the carpet bag Con
gressman from Florida, ia the last idol
that has turned to clay. Furman made
a speech the other day declaring that
Florida had voted for Tilden and re
proaching the Northern brethren with
the indifference which they had mani
fested to the brethren of the South.
The Radical journals denounce him in
nnmeaanred terms. They say he has
been accused of selling a cadetahip
that he has swindled the Government in
a live oak inspectorship, etc. The
Chicago Inter - Ocean taunts him with
being “a carpet-bagger from Pennsyl
vania." All these charges against Pub
man are doubtless true. They have
been made repeatedly by Democrats,
but, up to this time, the Republicans
would never listen to them. Aooording
to their account Pubman was an out
raged loyalist and exceedingly proper
man. Now the charges are true and he
is everything that is vile. They, how
ever, show the morality of their own
party by detailing its last transaction
with Pubman. Witness the Inter-
Ocean’s account:
He holds Governor Stearns' certificate as
re-elected to CoDgress, bnt his seat ia contest
ed. and I e has been offering to suppress this
speech for assurances that he should have an
office under Hates. His proposition has been
held in abeyance until the vote of Florida waa
counted, and last evening he was told that he
might make his speech if he lik'd, and say
whatever he desired. This morning he mace
a trade with the Democrats. The terms of the
trade are that he shall receive his mileage as
member of Congress up to next December,
when he is to retire and let his contestant take
his seat.
According to their own statement, the
friends of Hates juggled with Pubman
until the vote of Florida was secured
and then cut him adrift. We believe
the whole story, except that portion
which says he made a trade with the
Democrats. Iu the first place, he had
nothing to trade. The Florida esse bad
been decided and his speech could ac
complish nothing. We think that Pub
man is a scoundrel, who told the truth
for spite ; but we do not believe him to
be aDy worse than the scamps with
whom he was negotiating, and by whom
he was finally outwitted.
CASK, CHURCH ANDCAVILERS.
When the bill establishing the Electo
ral Commission was reported to Con
gress very few Democratic journals and
very few Democrats opposed the work
of the committee. When the measure
passed the Senate, against the wishes of
the most ultra Republicans in that body,
there nas scarcely a word of dissent
from the Democratic party. Radical states
men and Radioal journals were almost
alone iu their denunciation of the plan
of settlement proposed. When the bill
finally became a law, the whole people,
with the exceptions above named, seem
ed delighted, and an era of good feeling
succeeded the stormy discussions which
had grown out of the Presidential elec
tion. The Democrats were buoyant
with hope, and anticipated no trouble
in establishing their candidate’s claims
to the Presidency. They had only one
vote to gain; the Republicans had nine
teen. They could lose two of the three
tricks and win; the Republicans must
ti.ke every trick. They could win by
having the vote of a single
State counted for Tilden or by
having it rejected altogether, and
throwing the election in the House of
Representatives. Florida was their first
chance, and they lost it. Immediately
there comes a howl from the weak
kneed. “I told you so,” they say, when
they did not tell any such thing. We
have still four more chances. “I told
you so”—this is the dismal refrain.
Louisiana may be counted for Tilprn,
“I told you so.” One vote from Oregon
may be given to the Democracy, “I
told you so.” The vote of Louisiana
may be thrown out, “I told you so.
The vote of Oregon may be rejected.
“I told you so," They will listen to
nothing. They will not think for a mo
ment; they will not attempt to reason at
all. They will do nothing but keep up
this doleful and damnable iteration.
Mr. Carr, the successor of that true
patriot and wise man, Michael C. Keer,
was swift to rise from liis seat in the
House and denounce, in the harshest
and most unjustifiable language, the
Democrats who voted for the bill, and
who constitute ninety nine one-hun
dredths of that party in the House.
With matchless insolence be stood in
his place and stigmatized as traitors
men a thousand times more loyal to the
Democratic party and to the oountry
than himself. Why did he not hurl his
anathemas at the friends of the measure
when the bill was on its passage ?
If the oase of Florida had been
decided iu favor of the Democracy
not a word would he have uttered—not
one. If Louisiana or Oregon should be
counted for Tilden he would hasten to
retraoe his steps and squirm out of the
i position in which he has placed himself.
Chief Justice Church, of New York, is
another getftieman who makes haßte to
censure the plan of the Commission,
after he thinks it certain that Hates
will be made President. Judge Church
desired the Democratic Domination for
the Presidency, and did not get it.
Judge Church does not like Mr, Til
den, and Mr. Tilden did get it When
the bill was reported from the commit
tee, sod while it was pending iu Con
gress, Judge Church is not on record as
having said one word against its pass
age. If the Florida ease had been de
cided differently he would never have
opened his mouth. Now, he is out
spoken in his opinion that the law is
clearly unconstitutional and flagrantly
wrong. The Chief Justice talks pon
derously of “sticking to principle and
the Constitution.” He expresses great
surprise that Democrats, for the sake of
gaining a temporary advantage, should
be found willing to renoance the old
time Democratic doctrine of the rights of
the States as guaranteed by the Constitu
tion. “We had better, ” said ha, ‘'soak to
the Constitution and laws. If, in so
doing, we go down as a nation, there
may be a possibility of resurrection, but
if we go down, violating all constitu-j
tions and laws, there can never be are
surreetion,” 8o far as principle is con
cerned, no principle waa involved. So
far as the constitutionality of tu* sab
mission is brought into question, abler
lawyers than Judge Church, both in and
out of Congress, have not hesitated to
declare the bill perfectly in harmony
with the Constitution. The Democrats
in Congress who voted for the bill, and
the Democrats out of Congress who ap
proved it, need Dot mind the abuse of
the Carrs and the Churches. The men
who made it a law acted from conscien
tious motives. The bill seemed to them
the best as well as the only plan of ex
trication from the difficulties which sur
rounded the counting of the electoral
vote, and the verdict of the oountry is
in their favor, just as will be the judg
ment of posterity. Whatever may be
the result, we shall not question the
wisdom or the patriotism of the sup
porters ?f the bill. We belie?® tb*t the
Commission will o decide that TildZ>'
will tie made President. But if there
should be a different result we shall have
no words of oensure lot the men who
ga the Commission power te deter
mine the question.
Gov. Vance, of North Carolina, ia in
receipt of a letter from the Secretary of
War demanding the records of the offioe
of the Adjutant-General of thst State
for the years 1861 to 1865, inclusive.
Gov. Vance has replied, refusing to
comply with the demand, in the course
of his reply referring to certain North
Carolina letter books now in possession
of the Federal Government to which he
is not permitted access, but which have
been garbled by designing men and
used to his detriment.
THE TALER OF LAND- Hi GEORGIA.
The basis of all wealth is land. Land
is the Atlas which bears upon its
shoulders every trade and calling, every
branch of industry known to the world
and man. In order to show the condi
tion of the landed interest in Georgia and
the effect produced upon it by the panic
and the shrinkageof values, we have care
fully compiled, with the expenditure
of much time and labor, a table showing
the value of land in each county of the
State for four years—lß7l, 1874, 1875,
1876. The figures are taken from the
Comptroller-General’s books, and, we
think, will be found perfectly accurate.
The figures for 1871 will show what land
was worth just before the political affairs
of the Btate were settled by the Democ
racy obtaining entire possession of the
government. Those for 1874 show the
highest point reached, the tables for
1875 and 1876 the retrogression. The
effects of the panic whioh commenced in
the Autumn of 1873 were not felt in the
Bouth until a year later. The following
is the table:
counties. 1871 1874. 1875 1876.
Appling... .7.. 8568 73 8 62|8 59
Baker 2 78 2 16 2.03 1 1.93
Baldwin... 2.33 390 3 44 3 43
♦Banks 2.37 3.33 3.52 3.55
Bartow 628 8.50 880 7.30
Berrien 1.09 1.10 1.16 1.10
Bibb 1 62 9 31 10 59 9.86
Brooks 3.02! 3.42 3 51 3.00
Brvau 1.73 1.23 1.43 1.31
Bulloch 81 91 89 88
Burke 2.34 2 62 3.39 2 95
Butts.' 363 400 430 4 16
Calhoun.. 3.39! 2 69 2 54 2 23
Camden —I 1-65 197 1 77
Campbell 5.50 6 41 635 601
Carroll 3 77| 4 67 466 404
Catoosa 6.10 6.46 6 11 5.96
Charlton 35 70 60 43
Chatham 4 93|12.35 9 93 9.12
Chattahoochee ... 438 287 2.84 2.63
Chattooga 3 76 508 495 466
Cherokee 3 57 4.37 436 4.14
♦Clarke 3.40 471 592 6 19
Clay 2 84 2 77 2 76 2 60
Clavton 5.30] 744 7.71 7.55
Cliooh 73 89 99 90
Cobb 4.49 8.34 8.82 7.62
Coffee 65 60 58 50
Columbia 3 57 4.10 3.77 3.66
Colquitt | 70 94 86 84
Coweta 4.14 5.25 5 00 4.49
Crawford 3.09 290 2 67 2.58
Dade 5.52 6.05 682 626
♦DawsoD 1.59 3.00 3.03 3.04
Decatur 1 46 1-52 1 37 1.28
DeKalb 7.04 9.51 988 9 19
♦Dodge . 78 1 26 1 23 1 25
Dooly 2 54 2.83 2.78 2 64
Dougherty 436 5 12 4.04 3.23
Douglas.. 3.71 4.70 461 418
Early 2.03 2 001 1.82 1.62
Echols 50 1.16] 1.13 1 01
Effingham 1 42 1 35 1.36 1 29
Elbert 2.64 1.28 3 95 3.86
Emanuel 75 97 93 84
Fannin... 1.77 1 82 1 73 1 67
Fay. tie 4.76 5.00 474 2.07
Floyd 6 83 7.09 7.47 691
Forsyth ,3 82 4.58 4604 59
♦Franklin 254 4.86 390 3.91
Fulton 5.11 14.6714.42 14.29
♦Gilmer 1.49 1.51 1.45 1 47
Glascock 2.94 3.30 323 3.10
Glynn 265 1.92 332 342
♦Greene 392 5.00 4.87 445
Gordon 538 6.32 642 6,33
Gwiiinett. 3 44 5 06 5.00 4,46
Habersham ...... 147 200 194 1.90
Hall 2.05 3.61 3 67 3.56
Hancock 4.23 5.081 483 4.24
Haralson 241 3.19. 3.35 2,92
♦Harris 423 4.25 4.15 432
Hart 266 2.11 3 59 347
Heard,,. 407 442 3.76 8 66
Henry 4.32 551 5.47 5 10
Houston 462 ' 431 4.60 4.46
Irwin * 54! 96 94 90
Jackson 2.07] 3.92 4.10 4.03
Jasper 3.331 9.83 340 2.89
Jefferson 3.04 3,20 3 18 3.07
•Tohusou 1.40| 1.04 1.73 1.57
Jones 353 3.08 3.65 3.56
Laurens 1.33 1,50 1.44 1 35
Lee 5.27 3.90 3 24 2.99
Liberty 90 89 80 80
♦Lincoln 258 2.65 2.81 2 85
Lowndes 1.67 1.80 1.85 1.77
♦Lumpkin 1.75 1.74 1.70 1.71
Macon 417 3.26 3.19 2.87
♦Madison 2 37 3.18 3 20 3.27
Marion 3 87 3.24 2.86 2.55
McDuffie 8.50 3.70 3.04
♦Mclntosh 1 88 2.70 2.75 2 94
Meriwether 3 05 3,72 246 3 12
Miller 1 33 1.35 1.30 1.25
Milton " 4.78 5.75 5.65 5.45
♦Mitchell 3 19 2,69 2.48 2.49
Monroe 4 17 593 4.50 450
Montgomery.,,.., 66 1.97 68 05
Morgan..... 3 45 4.26 4.47 445
Murray 439 5.09 4.90 467
Muscogee 7.39 7.92 7.47 6.40
Newton 5 16 6.67 600 5.42
♦Oglethorpe 3.54 4 05 4.00 3.58
Paulding 3.87 5.37 542 5.03
Picken5..,,....,, 237 2.41 2.46 2.40
Pierae,.,, 50 66 71 62
Pike... 4 76 5,94 5.55 642
Polk 671 767 7.82 6.73
Pulaski 2.26 1.98 2.00 1 81
Putnam 425 4.21 442 4.22
Quitman 3.91 3.49 3.47 2 73
Rabun 79 94 97 94
Randolph 3 37 3.26 3.10 2 84
Richmond 3.64 9.13 9.08 8,92
Rockdale 588 8.17 8.34 7.25
Schley 4.39 4 10 3.79 3 34
Scriven 1.01 1,14 1.36 107
Spalding 3.02 6.72 6.48 5 77
♦Stewart 4 33 3.48 3.40 3 62
Sumter 4 17 522 5 72 3 77
Talbot 3.32 4 08 382 334
Taliaferro 3.01 3.34 3.58 3.10
♦Tatnall 77 82 70 72
Taylor 2.03 2.04 2.47 2 13
Telfair 69 1.21 1.04 101
Terrell 3.90 3.40 3.01 2.01
♦Thomas 2.20 2.78 2.06 2.49
Towns 1.62 1 79 1.98 1.95
Troup 482 532 532 452
Twiggs 235 1.81 228 2.11
Union 1.73 1 66 1.60 1.56
Unson 4.31 487 405 380
Walker 4.75 5.30 5.31 5 18
Walton 3.56 5 23 5.05 499
♦ Ware 29 81 56 70
Warren 3.91 4.29 4.12 3.91
♦Washington..... 326 3.88 3.63 3.70
Wayne 44 61 51 47
Webster 3.45 4.36 341 3.03
White 2.24 2.42 227 2.31
Wilcox 1.031 108 1.05 95
Wilkes 3.11| 4 28 425 4 24
Wilkerson 2 931 3,09 2.77 2.49
Whitfield 5.26 6.13 6.00 5.82
Worth... 1.421 1.64 1.47 1.36
♦The asterisk denotes an increase in
value last year as oompared with the
year preceding. From the above ex
hibit it will be seen that land in Georgia
have steadily decreased in value since
1874. Of the one hundred and thirty
six counties of the State only eighteen
show an iporease, and even in these the
increase has bepn exceedingly small.
The county of Oconee has been opaitted
from the table, beoanse that county has
beep made since 1871.
We feel gssurpd, however, that the
lowest point has beep reached * n the
value of this species of property and
that the tendency of prices will now be
upward. Hard times have done their
worst with the planting as well as with
every other interest, and the skies are
atippdy brightening. Land is eheap in
Georgia, there js no doubt about that.
But we’ hope that tpe apparent mis
chief msj be compensated by increased
immigration from Enrope and from the
Northern States tappted th > B very
cheapness. We believe that the pext
report of the Comptroller-General will
show a rally from the present depres
sion, Georgia is affected by the same
causes that affect the whole country. As
the country becomes more prosperous,
the prosperity of the State will increase
and lands will advanoe in value. After
all, however, immigration presents the
best and most oertain plan of makiDg
oar lands valuable. With the system of
small farms and thorough cultivation
generally adopted there is no reason
why laud iu Georgia should not be
worth as much as land in lowa or Illi
nois.
A vest peculiar feature in life insur
ance business hat been brought ont by
the testimony in the case of the insol
vent Continental Life Insurance Compa
ny of New York. A man by the name
of Hammond testifies that be was em
nloTed as an agent on a salary of $lO,-
JA* . ‘-*vel in the South and
000 a year, to - •-’dere He
West and freeze ont *
represented that the company was in
solvent, and by creating a panic among
the policy-holders, bought np the poli
cies for twenty-five cents on the dollar,
or thereabouts. This effected an enor
mous saving to the company on policies
nearly due, and wsa done for that pur
pose. Mr. Hammond says that risks
amounting to $200,000 in California
were extinguished by this process, and
policies outstanding to the amount of
$2,000,000 were brought down to $600,-
000 in two years.
CoL B. F. Sawyer baa retired from the
editorship of the Rome Courier, Jno.
Hix Bass, Esq., anooeeding him.
A WARNING Ttt PACKARD.
Whatever t xplanations may be given
ef the recent occurrence in New Orleans,
whether Weldon is a mau or myth,
whether he was drunk or crazy,
the fact remains that the people of Lou
isiaua are being made mad by outrage
and oppression, and that in this madness
they may adopt a summary mode of rid
ding themselves of their oppressors. It
may be that the man who sought to free
the world of the monster Packard is a
stranger and a madman—though his act
has not the color of Innacy. Bnt if he
is indeed insane, there is a terrible
method in his madness. It is the same
madness that sent the blade of Bhutus
to seek a scabbard in the bosom of the
Roman tyrant. It is the same madness
that nerved the arm that drove the dag
ger of Charlotte Corday home to the
heart of the murderous Marat. Snch
madness is contagions, and it is a ter
rible thing for tyrants when the people
thus become “mad.” We censure law
lessness, we eondem violence, we abhor
assassination; but we recognize the fact
that there are times, haply for humanity
not oft occurring, when the law is op
pression, when violence becomes virtue,
when assassination assumes the shape of
a judgment of that highest of all tribu
nals, the Court of Public Opinion. Under
some circumstances the assassin is
only an executioner. Let Packard
take care lest that time arrives in Louis
iana. We tell him that if the General
Government shall foist him upon the
people of that State his life will not be
worth the purchase of an honr. The
people of Louisiana have submitted for
four years. They have twioe resorted
to the ballot box; each time they won a
glorious victory, and each time they
were cheated of its fruits, and cheated
so bnnglingly that the whole world saw
the swindle and cried shame. They have
appealed to the]President for justice,
bnt in vain. The President has been in
league with the scoundrels of whom
they complained. They have sought
redress from Congress, bnt the dominant
party in that body, caring more for the
success of a faotion than the happi
ness of a people, has turned a deaf
ear to their appeals. They have
been the victims of continuous spo
liation, insult and oppression. They
have endnred wrongs sufficient to
have sent a hundred nations to the
field of battle. The men who have
cheated them, who have robbed them,
who have outraged them, may well trem
ble if the General Government decides
that they shall rule yet four years
longer. They know that they deserve
to die the death. The death of a hun
dred such carrion would not expiate the
ruin they have brought upon a fair
State and a high-spirited people. If
Packard is recognized as the Executive
of Louisiana the people of that unhappy
State, goaded by persecution to despera
tion, may determine that if they cannot
have a ruler of their own choosing they
will have none at all. When they thus
determine, woe to the sham Governor.
Nor bolts nor bars nor doors of iron can
save him from the fatal bullet or the
avenging steely
A PROBLEM OF TAXATION.
The great problem of taxation, and
how to impose its burdens impartially
upon the people, is slowly undergoing
more thorough investigation. A bill
has recently been offered in the Legis
lature of Missouri to embody in the
revenue system of that State the princi
ple of deducting debts from assets, and
taxing the property owner on the net
balance only. The bill provides that the
assessor in assessing a tax payer’s prop
erty shall allow a drawback to the
amount of all his bona fide indebted
ness, except notes or obligations given
to insurance companies for premiums on
polioies, subscriptions to religious, lit
erary, scientific or charitable institu
tions, subscriptions to the capital stock
of corporations, and debts due to per
sons ont of the State. All other debts,
such as notes secured by mortgage or
deed of trust, notes in bank, plain
promissory notes or due bills owed to
individuals, money owed on account
and past due interest—these are to be
deducted from the tax payer’s list, pro
vided be give to the assessor the name
or names of the person or persons to
whom they are owing. The object is
to tax a man only on what he actu
ally owns, and to exempt him from
paying on what he owes. If such
a scheme could be carried out in Mis
souri, we believe it wonld be adopt
ed in Georgia and in other States.
As at present framed, the tax laws
commit many acts of manifest in
justice. For instance a man in Augusta
buys a house for slo,ooo—paying $2,-
500 cash and giving his notes secured
by mortgage for the remaining $7,500.
He only owns an interest in the prop
erty to the extent of the cash payment;
he is liable to be dispossessed if the
other notes are not paid promptly at
maturity; yet he is required to pay
taxes on SIO,OOO worth of house, or on
87,500 more than he owns. The holder of
the mortgage is taxed in turn and a tax
on $17,500 is thus collected. In justice
the first party should only pay taxes on
$2,500 and the owner of the notes on
$7,500. This principle is correct in
theory bn.t it wonld prove very difficult
to reduce it to practice. Promissory
notes and mortgages are usually negoti
able instruments and pass freely from
one hand to another. The note which
A gave to B to secure the remaining pay
ments on a house might pass through
the hands of half a dozen letters of the
alphabet in the space of twelve months.
In this way it would be diffioalt to get a
correct tax return and the government
might be swindled out of the tax on
three-fourths of the property. At pres
ent we do not see how any tax can be
framed that will be just to the tax payer
on the one hand or that will protect the
government ou the other.
THE NEW YORK CITY DEBT.
The Controller of New York has sent
to the Legislature a clear statement of
the debt of tfiat pity. The permanent
or funded debt is about $130,000,000,
with a floating debt which varies from
$6,000,000 to $22,000,000, according to
the season of the year. This floating
debt is mostly money, borrowed in an
ticipation of the collection of taxes, and
to carry on street and other improve
ments eventually to be paid for by the
property benefitted. It seems a rather
wasteful system to borrow money in
May or June in anticipation of that
which is to be paid into the Treasury in
December, as the city has to pay interest
ou money borrowed, and of course re
ceives none from that which becomes due
some months late*. The amount paid
for interest on this floating debt is
$1 500 000. The Controller’s report
shows’that there are fifty issues of bonds
bearing four rates of interest, and twen
ty-five different kinds of bonds. The
oldest date® now ont are of the year
1841; the longest to rnn are fifty-year
bonds, maturing in 1926, In 1830 the
debt waa $3 82 per head ; in JBSO it was
$23 69 ; in 1870 it was $77 87; in 1875,
$lO5 25. The increase in 1874 was
$8,624,498 ; in 1875, $1,595,752. It will
be seen that the increase waa checked
in 1875, and it is certainly to bp hoped
that the present officials, who possess
the oonfidenae of both parties, will man
age to cany on the government without
-•Ming to the present enormous debt,
a>*-.
n opportunities
The State is offered . ♦'♦non
to get rid of her elephant—the
and Brunswick Railroad. One oompany
offers to lease for twenty years at a
rental ranging from $5,000 par month to
between SB,OOO and *9,006 per wm*.
The other oompany agrees to pay the
State $900,000 for the property, and, in
to tarn over to the State bonds
of the supplemental ieeue, the validity
of which are in dispute, to the amount
of $500,000. We hope the Legislature
will dispose of the property in some way
before adjournment
TILDEN LOSES LOUISIANA.
THE VOTE STANDS AS USI'AL,
EIGHT TO SEVEN.
The Cominiiuieu Will >'• Go Behind the Re
tarns—No Evidence Admissible—Proceed
ings of the Secret Session-Tile Demeerats
Offer Eight Resolotiens— Eight Republicans
Vete Them Down— Hoar’s Order Adopted—
Ne Donbt as to the Resalt.
Washington, February 16.—The Com
mission, *by a vote of ~eight to seven,
decided that no evidence can be received
in the Louisiana case except the elect
oral certificates. Numerous propositions
were made to take various kinds of evi
dence, but all were rejected by a vote
of eight tc> seven.
Commissioner Payne moved to allow
counsel one hour’s time, bnt oonnsel
declined, and the Commission resumed
its secret session with the view of reach
ing a final decision to-night.
Mr. Abbott’s Snbstltnte Lost.
The following are the resolutions
acted upon by the Commission :
Mr. Hoar submitted the following:
Ordered that the evidence be not re
ceived
Mr. Abbott offered the following as a
substitute:
Resolved, That evidence be received
to show that so much of the act of
Louisiana establishing the Returning
Board for that Stare is unconstitutional,
and the acts of the said Returning
Board are void.
The vote upon it was as follows;
Yeas, Messrs. Abbott, Bayard, Clifford,
Field, Hnnton, Payne and Thurman.
Nays, Messrs. Bradley, Edmnnds, Fre
linghnvsen, Garfield, Hoar, Miller,
Morton and Strong —B.
Mr. Abbott offered another suubsti
tnte, as follows :
Resolved, That evidenoe will be re
ceived to show that the Betnrning
Board of Louisiana, at the time of can
vassing and compiling the vote of that
State at the last election in that State,
was not leeally constituted under the
law establishing it, in this —that it was
composed of font persons of one politi
cal party instead of four persons of dif
ferent nartiea. Rejected by the same
vote. *
Mr. Abbott then oflared another sub
stitute :
Resolved, That the Commission will
receive testimony on the subjeot of the
frauds alleged in the specification of
counsel for the electors to certificates
one and three. Rejected by the same
vote.
Mr. Abbott then offered a fourth sub
stitute :
Resolved, That testimony tending _ to
show that the so-called Returning
Board of Louisiana had no jurisdiction
to canvass the vote for electors for Pres
ident and Vice-President is admissible.
Rejected by the same vote.
Mr. Abbott offered a fifth, which was
rejected by the same vote, which was as
follows :
Resolved, That evidence is admissible
that the statements and affidavits pur
porting to have been made and forward
ed to said Returning Board in pursuance
of the provisions of section 26 of elec
tion laws of 1872, alleging riot, intimi
dation at and near certain polls and in
oertain parishes, were false and fabri
cated, and forged by certain disreput
able persons under the direction and
knowledge of the said Returning
Board, knowing the said statements
and affidavits to be false and forged,
and that none of such statements and
affidavits were made in the manner or
form or within the time required by law,
and knowingly,wilfully and fraudulent ly
fail and refuse to canvass or compile
more than ton thousand votes oast as is
shown by the statement of the votes of
the Commissioners of Election.
Mr. Hnnton Tries His Hnnd.
Mr. Hnnton offered a sixth substitute,
as follows:
Resolved, That evidence bo received to
prove that the votes cast and given at
the said election on the 7th of November
last, as showu by the returns made by
the Commissioners of Election for the
said polls and voting places in said
State, have never been compiled nor
canvassed, and that the said Returning
Board never even pretended to compile
or canvass the returns by the said Com
missioners of Election, but that said
Returning Board only pretended to can
vass the returns made by the State Su
pervisors of Registration. Rejected by
the same vote.
Mr. Bayard Fiudx It Seven to Eight.
A seventh substitute was offered by
Mr. Bayard, as follows:
Resolved, That no person holding an
office of trust oi profit under the United
States is eligible to be appointed an
elector, and that this Commission will
receive evidence tending to prove such
ineligibility as offered by counsel for
objeotors to certificates Nos. 1 and 3.
Rejected by the same vote.
Judge Field Finds It the Same Way.
Mr. Justice Field offered the eighth
and last substitute, as follows:
Resolved, That in the opinion of the
Commission evidence is admissible upon
the several matters which the counsel
for objeotors to Nos. 1 and 3 offered to
prove. This was also rejeoted by the
same vote.
With Mr. Hoar It is Eight to Seven.
The question on the original order
submitted by Mr. Hoar came np, viz:
That the evidenoe offered be not re
ceived.
Mr. Payne moved to strike out the
“Not.” Rejected by the same vote.
The vote on the original order was
then taken and it was adopted by the
following vote: Yeas, Messrs. Bradley,
Edmunds, Frelinghuysen, Garfield,
Hoar, Miller, Morton and Strong— 8.
Nays, Messrs. Abbott, Bayard, Clifford,
Field, Hnnton, Payne and Thurman—7.
After this conclusion had been reach
by the Commission, counsel were admit
ted and the above resolutions were read
by the Secretary. The Commission is
now in secret session, but there is little
doubt of the result.
The Pinal Decision—B to 7.
Immediately after the doors were
closed Mr. Morton submitted a resolu
tion declaring that the votes of Hayes
and Wheeler electors of Louisiana
should be counted, and assigning rea
sons therefor, which are understood also
to cover the case of Oregon and South
Carolina. His resolution was adopted
by a vote of 8 to 7.
Justices Miller and Bradley and Rep
resentative Abbott were then appointed
a commitiee to draft a report for pre
sentation to Congress, and at 6:15 took
a recess to seven o’clock.
Notwithstanding that Morton’s reso
lution covers South Carolina and Ore
gon, it may oe received with a very
slight hope that the person who com
municated the information secretly may
have misconstrued it.
The Ooipifliaflion adjourned without
removing the pledge of secresy, Noth
ing farther transpired,
Morton’H Resolution.
The following is Morton’s resolution :
Resolved, That the persons named as
electors in certificate number one were
the lawful electors of the State of Lou
isiana, and that their votes are the votes
provided for by the Constitution of the
United States and should be counted
for President and Vice-President.
Justice Field then moved that an honr
be allowed to counsel on either side for
further argument.
Mr, Garfield said that the time allow
ed by the original order had been ex
hausted, anfi he objected to a farther
extension.
Mr. Morton suggested that oonnsel be
consulted about the subject. He would
vote against the motion, unless counsel
desired it. Mr. Evarts expressed a will
ingness to let the cass stand as it now
stood. Judge Campbell said that as the
Commission had excluded the evidence,
they had nothing to add to the argu
ment at present.
On motion of Mr. Hoar, the doors
were then closed, and thp Commission
resumed its secret session. The Com
mission reipained in sesß i° n until 8:57,
p. m., when, on motion of Mr. Ed
munds, an adjournment to 4, p. m., to
morrow was ordered.
The report ha ß been signed by the
eight, and will be presented to the joint
session to-morrow.
The Formal Report.
The report ia to the following effect: The
Electoral Commission having received
certain certificates and papers purport
ing to be certificates and papers accom
panying the same of the electoral
vote of the State of Louisiana and the
objections thereto, report that it has
duly consider the s*me *nd bas decided
and does hereby decide that the votes of
Wm. Pitt Kellogg, O. H. Brewster, Ac.,
named in the certificate of Wm. Pitt
Kellogg, Governor of said State, which
votes are certified by said person as ap
pears by the certificates submitted to
the Comraissiop as aforesaid, and mark
ed number one’ by said Copom ssion and
herewith returned, are the votes provid
ed for by thp Constitution of the United
States sod that the same are lawfully to
be counted as herein certified, namely :
Eight votes for Rutherford B. Rayes, of
gtate of Ohio, for President, and
- or Willi*® A- Wheeler, of
eight votes* President, The
New York, for >•• ' ./’’'ort that
Commission also decides and re*.
the eight persons first named wereduly
appointed, elated in and by said State
of that *********
briefly, is substantially aa follows: That
it is not competent to go into evidenoe
alimde aa to the papers opened by the
President of theiß thepresenoe
of the two Houses, to P™ve that oifier
oersons than those regularly certified
by the Governor of the State of Loan
iana, in and according to the determina
tion and declaration of their appoint
ment. Id other words, to go behind the
certificate of the Governor so far as it is
founded upon the action of the Return
ing Board. The Commission could not
receive any evidence to show that any
elector was ineligible on the 7th of No
vember, the day of the election, on the
ground that it was not essential to show
who was ineligible on that day, so long
as he was eligible on the day when he
cast his vole in the Electoral College,
and the fact appears that the alleged in
eligible electors, Brewster and Levisee,
were chosen to fiil vacancies caused by
their own absence from the college, *and
there was no allegation of ineligibility
when they oast their vote. The Demo
crats will caucus to morrow^ morning.
No Factious Oppposition—The Count to Go
Senlurl; On, and the Electoral l>aw to be
Enforced—A Solemn Protest to Shameless
Frauds.
Washington, February 17.—Promi
nent Democrats say there will be no
factious opposition when the two Houses
meet in joint session Monday. Recess
to ten Monday.
The Democratic Caucus.
The Democratic caucus of the House
and Senate to-night adopted the follow
ing, and authorized its publication :
Resolved, That the count of the elec
toral vote shall proceed without dilatory
opposition to the orderly execution of
the act of Congress creating the Electo
ral Commission, whose decision shall be
received and acted upon in accordance
with the provisions of the said law ;
but this resolution is accompanied
with the solemn and earnest protest
of the Democratic party against the
gross and shameless violations of law,
justice and truth contained in the de
cisions of the majority who signed the
same in the cases of Florida and Louis
iana.
The resolution adopted was a substi
tute offered by Mr. Reagan, of Texas,
to one already before the caucus, a text
of which has not transpired. The pro
test was in the shape of an amendment
offered by Bright, of Tennessee. The
vote was 69 to 40.
BONDHOLDERS’ CONCLAVE.
The Bankers in Council—The Debt of Vir
ginia— Leniency With the States— Railroad
Bondholders in Session, y
New York, February 15.—The com
mittee of bankers appointed to enter
into arrangements ior the settlement of
the debts of several Southern States had
a private meeting last evening. The
subject considered at most length was
the debt of Virginia. The feeling of the
committee from the first was notably
that of sympathy, and a desire was
evinced to be as liberal as possible with
this State as well as with all those which
will in the future be included in the
committee’s deliberations. The discus
sion to some extent included other
States, but Virginia alone was treated at
length. No conclusion was reached
when the committee adjourned.
A meeting of the consolidated mort
gage bondholders of the New Orleans,
Jackson and Great Northern Railroad
Company, and of the Mississippi Cen
tral Railrond Company, was held to-day.
There were present parties representing
over $5,000,000 worth of bonds. Wilson
G. Hunt presided, and stated that the
meeting was called with a view to devise
measures which would enable consoli
dated bondholders who desired to par
ticipate in the foreclosure and purohase
of their railways to do so. On motion,
and without transacting aDy other busi
ness, the meeting adjourned until Febru
ary 26th, in order that representatives
of bondholders residing in England,
who are to be here in another week,
should be present at the meeting and
participate iu the proceedings on behalf
cf the bondholders whom they repre
sent.
George 8. Coe, Chairman of the Com
mittee on the Southern State debts, said
to-day that the meeting last night was
altogether informal and that no plan of
action was • resolved upon, members
only considering suggestions and inter
changing ideas. The subject being so
important, much time will be required
to consult various interests involved.
Correspondence with States involved
will be had. The committee adjourned
without fixing any date for the next
meeting.
THE FIFTEENTH JUDGE.
Wliat “Gath” Has to Say of the President
Maker. .
And who is Justice Bradley ? Well,
he was an ornament to the lobby. You
have probably heard of the lobby ? No !
Is it possible ? I thought every one had
heard of this third estate of the Govern
ment, that owing to the dirt accumulat
ed about it, might well be oalled real es
tate. It is the agency established by Con
gress to facilitate business between it and
the people appearing before it possessed
of claims of all sorts. As the Representa
tive represents and the agent reflects the
tone and character of his employer, the
lobby is quite as bad as Congress, and
is generally composed of mean men and
lewd women. Attorney Bradley was in
the lobby working for the New Jersey
railroad companies. Attorney Srtong was
likewise in the lobby laboring for the
Pennsylvania railroad companies. These
two gentlemen had other clients and
were mixed in other schemes, but these
were their principal employments and
interests.
While the two workers were hanging
about the passage and committee rooms
of Congress, the Supreme Court, under
Chase, Chief Justice, promulgated its
celebrated decisiou in the legal tender
case. This gravely affected the railroad
interests so largely represented by
Messrs. Bra dey and Strong. The com
panies hurried to Washington in a hich
state of alarm. In a few days the Ar
lington, Willard’s and Ebbitt were
thronged with bald headed, round
bellied parties of the highest respectabil
ity in appearance—all were rogues
disguised under stocks and clean shirts.
Their first move was a law of Congress
increasing the Supreme Bench two mem
bers. They found on count that with
such addition that they could vote down
Chief Justice Chase and his gold tender
associates. Poor Chase, he saw what
was coming and fought hard against the
packing, but fought in vain ! The in
iquity was consummated. It was not
consummated until Grant sent into the
Senate two names to fill the places. Of
course, places on the Supreme Bench
are not to be had every day, and the
most eminent men in the legal profes
sion in the country were spoken of.
Evarts, Curtis, Black and others were
canvassed, but Grant said openlv, and,
among others, to my friend Mr. John A.
C. Gray, of New York, that he would
nominate no man to either place who
was not pledged to a reversal of the
legal tender decisions. He was good as
bis word, and to the amazement of the
world at large, and to the delight of all
the heavy corporations, he nominated
Messrs. Strong and Bradley. The lobby
got drunk on champagne with delight,
and in due course of indecent haste the
legal tender decision was reversed.
SENATOR BAYARD’S OPINION,
The Hot-Headed Partisans To Be Sent To
the Rear.
Washington, February 12. —Senator
Bayard, who has all along had the live
liest faith, from the justice of the Demo
cratic cause, in the favorable decision of
the Commission, whioh he had great
part in creating and of which he is a
conspicuous member, remarked this af
ternoon in answer to a suggestion that
an effort might be made to break up the
Commission before its work is done :
“No, sir ; they may defeat as, but they
can’t disgrace us. They may bring up
misfortune, but they can’t bring us into
contempt.” He thus meant to convey
the impression that the conservative
counsels of the leaders of his party
would prevail over the hot-headed in
cendiary demands of its mere partisan
politieians. In this connection it may
be well to give the opinion of Redfield,
the talented correspondent of the Cin
cinnati Commercial: “In my opinion,”
says he, “the verdict of the tribunal
will make the President. There may be
a lot of swearing, but the better sense of
the Democracy will prevail.”
—■
Everybody Expected to Acqalpoce.
[New York Berate.]
A disputed election is a great calami
ty—a sense of injustice suffered is not a
slight matter; but this great question
has been submitted to the arbitration of
wise and honorable men, who will, we
believe, conscientiously do the solemn
duty imposed on them; and whin they
have done it, and when Congress has
done its Bhare under the law, whatever
thp may be, that is final -until
the next election. Two years hence
those who may think themselves ag
grieved, be they Democrats or Republi
cans, can appeal to the people; bqt until
then all men aye bqund—sacredly bound
—to accept the result, as we have no
doubt they will,”
When the Era it Misfortune Will End.
[New York World. J
The erkOl misfortune Which corruption
has brought upon the country W'U end
when honor fceegraee the motto of office
holders and honesty tn P rplg of capital
ists This generation shall not paw
away before we see it again the fashion
for a man to hang his head in shame
when he oonfeasee that he is a rogue.
MAfKET AN'D HAYES.
ANOTHER INTERVIEW WITH THE
CAROLINA JUDGE.
Hi. Visit to Hayes—The Case of Carolina—
Hayes’ Feelings Toward* the Baath—What
Will Be Hie Policy as President—His Opln
ioa of Senator Hill—ln Favor of Honest
Local Governments.
Judge T. J. Mackey, of South Caro
lina, was in Macon Wednesday, and at
his own request was interviewed by one
of the editors of the Telrgraph and
Messenger. He spoke of his visit to
Hayes recently :
When he entered the parlor of the
Radical chief, the first object that chal
lenged his attention was a picture on
the mantlepieoe which satisfied him that
he would not fail in his mission as a
representative of the oanse of down
trodden South Carolina. This was a
photograph of two persons in the atti
tude of clasping hands. One was Hayes
himself and the other Colonel Guy M.
Bryan, of Texas, who served in the Con
federate army, and is now the Speaker
of the Democratic House of Representa
tives iu that State. The latter is a Vir
ginian by birth, and in the expressive
language of the Judge, “as Southern as
the sun.” The pioture was taken a few
years ago. Governor Hayes, pointing t >
it, said, “He is the dearest friend I have
on earth; that does not look that if I
am President I shall be swayed by in
fluences very hostile to the South.”
These, our informer said, were his ‘‘exact
words.” The Governor continued;
“Some of my happiest days were spent
with Bryan in Texas, but like a good
Democrat, he voted against me.” Jndge
Mackey laid the whole case of Carolina
before him, supporting bis statements
with documentary evidence.
Governor Hayes expressed himself as
appalled at the misgovernment so long
flagrant and dismtrous in South Caro
lina. He said : “I regard the Presi
dential contest in the form that it has
assumed as most uncertain as to its re
sult. I shall perform no act to influence
that result, but do say unreservedly that
the great need of the South is good gov
ernment, and if I am President, I shall
use all legitimate agencies to foster the
establishment in that long disturbed
section of intelligent and honest local
self-government. ”
Governor Hayes Is Libera] ia His Political
Views,
As shown by the fact that during his
present term of office he has appointed
two Democrats out of five Justices of
the Supreme Court, and one Liberal
Republican who voted against him, in
the State of Ohio. He called attention
to this fact himself, as an indication of
his political animus. The Governor also
handed Judge Mackey a copy of his
message in 1872, iu which he stated that
minority representation on Returning
Boards was necessary to prevent their
becoming formidable engines to subvert
the will of the people. And in accord
ance with his recommendation, the Ohio
Legislature enacted a law which gives
to the minority a representation of three
out of every seven in the Returning
Boards of every county in Ohio.
Judge Mackey said that Bristow and
Carl Schurz canvassed Ohio for Hayes,
and they are regarded as the two Re
publicans “who most typify Republican
reform.” He is of the opinion that,
judged by the standard of success, the
ability of the Radioal candidate has
been greatly underrated.
What He Bays of Hampton.
Governor Hayes stated that the let
ter of General Hampton “would be
bailed as a messenger of peace through
out the North, coming, as it does, from
a supporter of Governor Tilden, and a
Democrat, whose fidelity to his party
was above suspicion. More especially
as Hampton is a representative man of
the martial element ->f the Southern
States, without who aid the De
mocracy of the North mid make (his
exact language) bu i short war.”
Hayes says, also, “this is not the first
time that I have had occosion to com
mend General Hampton. On July 5,
1867, in a short speeoh delivered by me
at Lebanon, Ohio, I referred to bis
(Hampton’s) advanced views in favor of
granting suffrage to the colored people,
and held him up as a splendid exan:ple
for the Democracy of Ohio on this .sub
ject, as they were then opposing an
amendment to the State Constitution
conferring the right of suffrage upon
the negro.”
Mr. Hayes also declared that “the
people of the Northwest will seek
Homed in the denial Climate of the South*
Where lauds are abundant and cheap,
whenever good government, honestly and
economically administered, and which
respects the rights of all, is established
iu that section. They will desire, how
ever, that they shall receive a kind wel
come, if personally worthy, and that no
personal discriminations are made
against them. With these conditions
complied with [his exact language), the
capital of the North will pour into the
Sourthern States in a golden stream.”
He said, further, that the Republicans
of the North are the natural allies of
the Southern Democrats, owning the
greater portion of the property, and
controlling the chief enterprises of the
Northern States, just as the Democrats
in the South chiefly represent its prop
erty, intelligence and virtue.”
At this point Governor Hayes also
stated that, “We of Ohio have recently
subscribed twenty millions of dollars to
build the Cincinnati and Great South
ern Air Line Railroad to Atlanta, Geor
gia, via Chattanooga. This alone gives
us aa immense financial interest in the
prosperity ot Georgia, South Carolina
and their sister Southern States. For
if their property sinks under bad gov
ernment it reacts directly upon us.”
What He Thinks of Georgia’s New Senator.
Governor Hayes expressed a high ad
miration for Senator B. H. Hill in view
“of his recent highly temperate course,”
and earnestly hoped that he would be
eleoted to the United States Senate.
Judge Mackey says, “Mr. Hill’s influ
ence will be vast with Hayes if he is
seated.”
Carolina Affairs.
Judge Mackey says “any attempt of
the Federal Government to enforce the
authority of Governor Chamberlain will
he met with arms; and we will make the
attempt to crush out civilization in that
State too costly to be long persisted in.
In such a struggle we should not be con
tending for what the North terms the
heresy of State Rights, but for true
popular sovereignty and for our altars
aDd hearthstones. We would be able to
rally around us not ODly all the true men
of the South, but many of the scarred
veterans of the North, who fought for
the Union. We are willing to leave our
o use, as symbolized by Wade Hamp
ton, to the judgment of the men to
whooi we surrendered at Appomattox
Court House."
Hamptoq f*nd Chamberlain Tax Collections.
“As proof of the unity of our people
upon this question, I mention the fact
that Chamberlain’s Tax Collectors have
been trying to collect taxes at the rate
of fourteen mills on the dollar, State
tax, for the past six weeks, and have not
received as much as one thousand dol
lars from the whole State np to last Sat
urday night, while Hampton has been
engaged for ten days only in collecting
at the rate of two mills on the dollar,
and has had paid in one hundred and
twenty-three thousand dollars.”
In conclusion, Judge Mackey said :
“I am satisfied that Hayes will be de
clared President, and that one of his
first acts will be to recognise the gov
ernment of Hampton in South Carolina
and Nioholls in Louisiana. I regard
his utterances to me as meaning this.
But recognition or no recognition, we
shall sustain Governor Hampton to the
bitter end, invoking the Constitution of
the Union and standing under the flag
of our country.”
THE COMMITTEE QUIZ.
Tilden’s Bank Account—fen{li>(eny in liOg
lulann—H.w Wells was Incorruptible, or
How tbe Democrat* Did Not Have .Honey
Enough to Bribe Him.
Washington, February 17.—Before
the Privileges and Elections Committee,
Cashier Jordan declined to answer ques
tions until he could consult his lawyer.
He had consulted only the President
and Directors of the bank, but refused
to state their advice. The questions re
ferred to tbe bank acoonnt of Tilden,
Hewitt and Pelton.
The committee went into private see.
sion. „ ...
Honor’s box of papers, said to eover
all the Louisiana election returns, is
four feet long, two wide and two deep.
The papers are useless now, unless they
can be brought to bear on the State
government of Louisiana.
Before the Privileges and Powers
Committee, D. F. Kenner testified
that Governor Wells told an untruth
when he said that Kenner offered
to bribe Wells to oast tbe vote
of Louisiana for Tilden. Daring a long
conversation Wells said he must be rc
warded, but did not mention the snm,
as he had to consult Tom Anderson. At
a subsequent interview, Wells said An-,
derson wanted half a million. Kenney
said thfs V4® fidicftlons. Wells said,
“Wait a few days longer.” Subsequent,
ly Wells said he oould not give a fair
count, but would return enough votes to
save Nicholls for two hundred thousand
dollars in hand. Witness replied that
be bad not that sum. This closed the
negotiations.
Stop that coughing ; if you do not it
may kill you. A bottle of Dr. Bull a
Cough Syrup only posts yon $5 cents,
and its timely 4*® may save your qfe.
THE SUPREME COURT.
DECISIONS RENDERED IN ATLAN
TA LAST TUESDAY.
\ Alania (institution.]
Johnson vs. State. Perjury, from Sum
ter.
Warner, 0. J.
The defendant was indicted for the
offense of perjury, and on trial therefor
was found guilty. A motion was made
for anew trial, on the various grounds
therein set forth, which was overruled
bv the Court, and the defendant except
ed. The main ground of error insisted
on here was the admission of the re
cord of the trial of the case in the
Malitia District Court, in whiohthe per
jury Was alleged to have been s'oommit
ed, over tbe objections of the defendant.
The objection to the introduction of
that was that it did not affirmatively
show, upon its faoe, that the Court
which tried the case of larceny, on
which trial the defendant was oharged
with having committed the offense of
perjury, had jurisdiction thereof under
the provisions of the 3d seotion of the
act of 1873, to organize a Criminal
Court of the county of Sumter. The
3d seotiou of that act declares “that all
offenses shall be tried before said Court
upon written accusation, fouuded upon
affidavit; said affidavit shall distinctly
set forth the nature of the offense, tue
time when oommitteed, and by whom
committed; and the accusation shall
follow the affidavit, aud shall be signed
by the accuser. ”
The affidavit of Levi Johnson, the ac
ouser, states that Fr nk Johnson did, on
the Bt,h of April, 1876, in the county of
Sumter, commit the offense of simple
larceny, and deponent makes this affida
vit that an accusation may be made
against the said Frank Johnson in the
District Court of said county. The ac
cusation sets out the offense and charges
the defendant, on the Br.h of April, 1876,
in the county of umter, with the un
lawfully taking and carrying away from
the possession of deponent one Muscovy
dock, of the value of one dollar, with
intent to steal the same, contrary to the
laws of said State, etc. The question is
whether the nature of the offense should
be distinctly set forth in the affidavit in
order to give tbe Court jurisdiction, or
whether it is sufficient to charge the de
fendant with the offense of simple larce
ny iu the affidavit, aud then set forth
the nature of the offeuse in the accn
satiou, as was done in this ease ? By
the first section of the act of 1873, the
Court had no jurisdiction to try of
fenses of simple larceny when the pnn
inshmer.t for that offense was imprison
ment in the peniten iary. There arc
different grades of the offense of simple
larceny recognized by the penal laws of
this State, some of which are felonies
punishable by imprisonment in the
penitentiary, and some of whiclrare not
felonies and puuishable by imprison
ment in the penitentiary. The Militia
District Court iu Sumter was a Court of
special and limited jurisdiction, limited
to the trial of suoh offenseses of simple
laroeny only as are not punishable by
imprisonment iu the penitentiary. What
is.the foundation for the jurisdiction of
that Court as declared by the statute ?
An affidavit distinctly setting forth the
nature of the offense, the time when
committed, aud by whom committed,
and the accusation shall follow the affi
davit. The accusation is to be founded
on the affidavit, and shall follow it, in
the imperative words of the statute.
Why should the affidavit set forth the
nature of the offense? Because that is
indispensably necessary to show that the
simple larceny charge is of that grade
of which the Court has jurisdiction to
try. Before that Court can proceed to
try a ease of simple laroeny, it must
first have judicial evidence that it, is of
that grade which is within its jurisdic
tion to try, and ho# can the Court have
that judicial evidence except by the affi
davit as required by the statute? The
accusation is nothing but mere pleading
founded on the affidavit, and must fol
low it. Besides, the affidavit may be
made by one person, aud the acousatiou
be made by another, but the accusation
is founded on the affidavit, and must
follow it, whoever may be the acouser.
The affidavit required by the statute is
the foundation of the accusation, aud
unless the affidavit shall distinctly set
forth the nature of the offense, so as to
show that it ia one of which the Court
has jurisdiction, the accusation which is
founded upon the affidavit and must
follow it, cannot do so. Where there is
no affidavit as a foundation to support
the accusation, the accus ition itself is
worthless. The affidavit offered in evi
dence merely states that Frank Johnson
did commit the offense of simple larce
ny, but does not state the nature or
grade of that larceny, so as to show af
firmatively that the Court had jurisdic
tion to try it, and for that reason the
record of the trial in the Militia District
Court of the county of Sumter should
have been rejected, and the Court erred
iu admitting it in evidence. Let the
judgment of the Court below be re
versed.
Peel vs. Shepherd. Certiorari, from
Webster.
Wabneb, C. J.
It appears from the record and bill of
exceptions in this oase, that Peel sued
Shepherd in a Justice’s Court on an ac
count of sl2, for making a pair of boots;
that the boots were made by one Do',an
who was in the employ of plaintiff, out
of material owned and furnished by the
plaintiff; that the boots made by Dolan
were made by him, pluintiff, and were
his boots, and that defendant refused to
pay for them ; that plaintiff allowed Do
lan to contract for work and receive pay
for it; that Dolan was not his agent but
his employee ; that he never authorized
Dolan to place to his, Dolan’s, credit any
of his work, material or effects what
ever. This was in substance the plain
tiff's evidence before the Justice. The
defendant testified, in substance, that in
June, 1875, he contracted with Dolaa to
make him a pair of boots for sl2, which
he got in November, 1875 ; that he paid
Dolan in part for them by giving his
account credit for $8 40; that at the
time he got the boots, did not know tkut
Dolan was in the plaintiff’s employ
ment, and not until two or three weeks
after he got them, when the plaintiff
asked him for the money ; that he then
owed a small balance for the boots,
some three or four dollars, which he
told the plaintiff he was willing to pay
to him if Dolan was willing, bat plain
tiff refused to take it. The Justice ren
dered a judgment in favor of the de
fendant. The plaintiff sued out a writ
of certiorari, and brought the case be
fore the Superior Court, and after argu
ment had thereon the Court affirmed
the judgment of the Justice and dis
missed the certiorari , Whereupon the
plaintiff accepted. This is a very small
oase, but tbe legal principles involved
in it are not any the less important on
that account. In our judgment, thepay
ment by the defendant of the sum of
$8 40 to Dolan for the boots, by credit
ing his acoonnt therewith, before he had
any knowledge that he was tbe agent
and employee of the plaintiff, should
have been allowed to him; but the bal
ance that was due by the defendant for
the boots, after he had notice that Dolan
was only the agent and employee o£ the
plaintiff in making them out of his, the
plaintiff’s, materials, should have been
paid to the plaintiff by the defendant,
and that the plaintiff was legally enti
tled to recover that balance from the de
fendant, and the fact that be offered to
pay that balance to the plaintiff; who
declined ta receive it, did not exonerate
him from the payment thereof, unless
he had paid the same into Court when
the plaintiff sued him for the price of
the boots. The Court erred in not su3
taining the certiorari and ordering a
new trial, on the statement cf facts con
tained in therecord. Let the judgment
of the Court below be reversed.
Bleckley, J., concurred. Jackson, J.,
dissented. ——
Jowers vs. Bland.*- Trover and bail,
-from Webster.
Bleckley, J.
1 Wheo, in a contruot for the sale of
personal property, it is stipulated that
the seller is to retain title until the price
is paid in full, the title does not pass by
delivery of the property to the pur
chaser. Such a contract, when reduced
to writing and signed by the pa ties, is
not a mortgage. 2. When the seller is
represented in the contract" by an agent
who retains the title in himself as agent,
the legal effeot is to leave the title in his
principal. And it makes no difference
to whom the notea given for the pur
chase money are made payable. 8 Af
ter default of the buyer in paying the
price according to contract, and after
demand upon him for the property and
his refusal to return it, the seller may
assert his title by action of trover against
him. The agent need not sue in his
own name; the action lies in the name
of the principal. 4. Under the plain
tiff's evidenoe the Court did not err in
refusing to award a non-snit. o. Affida
vit to require bail in trover may be
made in this State before a Notary Pub
lic. The notary need not attest it under
bia notarial seal or any other seal. 6.
On the trial of an action of trover, m
which bail has been required and given,
it is not competent for the defendant,
while the case is proceeding before the
jary to make a motion orally to the
Court to dismiss the bail proceeding
and in support of the motion to intro
duce evidenoe in denial of the official
character of the person whose attests
tion appears officially to the bail afflda
vit. Judgment affirmed.
Smith vs. Bash. Rule, from Webster.
Bleckley, J.
L Wheq attorney at law is ruled
for not paying over money collected, his
answer to the rule is traversable ; an
the issue thus fromed is for trial by
a jury. Code, sections 3950, 3953, 3954.
2. The verdict, is not wiinswit sufficient
evidence to support, it on the special
matter pnt in is-ue by tbe answer and
the traverse. 3 An attorney at law
is an officer of the Court, und a rule ab
solute against him may be enforced by
attachment for contempt or by execu
tion against his property, at the option
of the plaintiff. Code, section 3956. 4.
Where the record is silent as to demand
before the rule was brought, and no
point on demand seems to have been
made in the Court below, and where the
sole cause shown by the answer against
making the rule absolute was that the
money had not been collected, and the
answer has been found untrue by the
jury, the judgment making the rale ab
solute will not be disturbed beoause no
evidence of demand is in the record.
Judgment affirmed.
Jordan & Comer vs. West. Assumpsit,
from Sumter.
Bleckley, J.
1. The refusal of written requests to
charge is not cause for new trial, where
the oharge given was reasonably full
and substantially oorreet, and where the
verdict is clearly warranted by the evi
dence. 2. The oase turned chiefly on
the faets, and the verdict is satisfactory
to this Court, as it was to the Court be
low. Judgment affirmed.
Greer vs. Southwestern Railroad Com
pany. Motion, from Macon.
Bleckley, J.
Where the plaintiff, after a verdioit is
found against him, moves for anew
trial and then dismisses his motion,
the officers of Court aie not entitled to
have an order to enter up judgment
against the defendant for oosts, although
the dismissal of the motion was induced
by the defendant’s agreeing to pay, and
paying the fee of the plaintiff's attor
ney. Under such circumstances the
plaintiff is the party cast, and therefore
liable for oots. Judgment affirmed.
Eaton vs. Freeman. Complaint for land,
from Terrill.
Bleckley, J.
1. Where the verdiot is for the prem
ises in dispute, and a large amount for
mesne profits, aud there is no evidenoe
in the record on the subject of mesne
profits, the verdict, as a whole, is with
out sufficient evidenoe to support it. 2.
Where the plaiutiff's evidenoe shows
that the defendant aoquired possession
of the premises under a written oontract
between the parties for on change of
lands, the oontract to be produoed or
accounted for, its terms, and failure
by defendant to comply with them,
ought to appear. 3. A deed executed in
another State and attested by two witnes
ses, one of whom purports to be a Justice
of the Peace, is not prepared for record
without further authentication ; and
though reoordud, it is not admissible iu
evidence, even as oolor of title, without
proof of execution. Judgment reversed.
Maxwell, et al., Commissioners, vs.
John B. Gumming. Mandamus, from
Lee.
Jackson, J.
1. The Judge of the Superior Court
has no legal authority to appoint a de
tective or speoial officer to hunt, up and
arrest and bring back to the county
whence he escaped an esoaped prisoner,
to pass an order, on the approval of the
grand jury or otherwise, that the county
pay such detective or speoial officer $250
for his services, and to enforce suoh or
der by mandamus to the County Com
missioners to pay the same out of the
couuty treasury, aud if they have not
(he money, to order the Commissioners
to tax the people of the county to raise
it. Judgment reversed.
Wm. Usery and wife vs. Pryor, Bost
wick, et al. In equity, from Sumter.
Jackson, J.
The complainants having amended
their bill by striking therefrom the
prayer for relief agaiust the only par
ties defendsnt against whom they had
any equitable rights, leaving only de
fendants in respeot to whom the rem
edy at law was adequate and complete,
tho bill was properly dismissed. Judg
ment affirmed.
John T. Kelsoe vs. Slaughter Hill. Mo
tion to enter judgment nunc pro tunc,
from Macon.
Jaokson, J.
Where, by inadvertence, counsel fail
to enter up judgment on a recovery in
an aotion of trespass vi et armis within
four days after adjournment of tbe
Court, the Court may, at a succeeding
term, on due notice to the defendant,
grant an order to enter up the samo
nunc pro tunc. Judgment affirmed.
Joel W. Perry, administrator, vs. John
B. Mulligan. Declaration in attach
ment, from Early.
Jaokson, J.
1. The sufficiency of the bond ia at
tachment oases, in respect to the solven
cy of the surety, is matter primarily for
the consideration of the officer issuing
the same, and not for the Superior Court
on the trial of the cause, especially
where the defendant ha? received notice
of the suit, and has pleaded to the
merits. Code 3,271; 55 Ga., 454. 2.
After a party has taken and enjoyed
large benefits from an award, it is
too late for him to object thereto,
on the ground that his agent had no
written or other legal authority to bind
him by the submission. 3. The declara
tion in attachment may be amended by
striking out "Georgia, Decatur coun
ty,” and inserting “Georgia, Early coun
ty,” the true venue of the oause being
Early county and the trial pending
therein. 4. If part of the answer to an
interrogatory be read by tho party who
sued out the interrogatories, he should
read at least all of that answer; but. if
the other side afterwards read all. the
answers and the right to conclude the
argument does not turn on hi's being
forced to do so, no harm will v jave been
done, and anew trial will nr,'t be grant
ed on au error which proved to be harm
less. 5. One party to record is not
a competent witness f,o prove transac
tions touching the j D the case be
tween himself and .he other party who
is dead. If such a party be offered as a
witness by the other side and be ex
amined only in respect to matters which
did not transpire between the witness
and the deceased, while the cross-exami
nation should be full in respect to the
matters so inquired about on the direct
examination, it should not operate as a
license to tho party examined to testify to
transactions which took place between
him and deceased,such as delivery of pro
perty and payment of money to deceased
in compliance with an award, the de
livery and payment being a vital issue
in the case. 6. If the agent of the
dead party has been examined as a wit
ness in the case by interrogatories, the
other party may testify in respect to
transactions between himself and suoh
agent, though the agent bv dead at the
time of the trial. 7. Anew trial should
not be granted on newly discovered
evidence which is not admissible and
could not affect the merits of the oase.
8 The charge to the effect that tho
whole issue in. the case was confined to
compliance ,ir non-compliance with the
award, an.u that neither party could go
behind, under the facts of this case, was
right. 9 The Court, in a oivil case,
may recoive the verdiot in the absence
of tbe defendant and his counsel, es
pecially if they were called into Court
before the verdiot was received and did
not respond. Judgment affirmed.
A. M, Moore vs. Willis Martin. Same
vs Rryunt. Foreclosure of litu, from
Terrell.
Jackson, J,
1. Whilst the affidavit to foreclose a
merchant's lien for fertilizers must show
that it is prosecuted within one year af
ter the debt becomes due, yet the aver
ment in the affidavit meets fully the re
quirement of the statnte, if it alleges
that the debt was contracted on the 27th
of February, 1874, for fertilizers fur
nished that year, and that it fell due on
the Ist of November, 1874, and the affi
davit itself was made on of No
vember, 1874. These figures appearing
on the face of the affidavit, whioh is the
commencement of tbe prosecution of
foreclosure, make it as oertain as figures
can that the prosecution is within one
year after tbe debt became doe. 2. The
demand and refusal to pay averred in
plaintiff’s affidavit may be traversed,
and denied by defendant's eonuter-affi
davit, and form an issue to be tried, and,
if found against the plaintiff, his right
to foreclose the lien fails. Jadgment
reversed.
Warner, C. J., concurred.
Bleckley, J., concurring.
Demand for payment does not affect
the amount or the j ustiee of the claim,
or the existence of the lien. It is a step
in tbe remedy, and is not in order nntil
after the right has become perfect.—
When demand is duly averred in the
creditor’s affidavit, the law treats it a*
established, and has made no provision
for traversing or contesting the aver
ment. The defenses which may be
urged by counter affidavit are snoh as
bar the proceedings, in whole ov in part,
and not snoh as merely abate it.
Central Ball road Htoek,
Mr. J. I. Palmer, auctioneer, sold yes
terday, in front of tb banking house of
Mr. G. P. Carry, on Broad street, eleven
shares of Centra) Railroad stock to G. P
Curry, Esq., at $35.