Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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.