Lexington union. (Lexington, Miss.) 1838-18??, 1841-07-24


Bur, say great many people, we find
that many legal gentlemen say that the
state is legally bound-that many Of them
are becoming candidates for the legisIa-
ture and are taking the stump in favor of
the payment Of the bonds. The business
of a lawyer is to take fees when he can
get them, and 1 have seen but few in The
course Of my limited observation that
would not take fee on either side; he did
not stop to enquire which was the wrong
and which was the right side, but rallied
on the side upon which he could get tho
largest fee, Now in the case before US,
the bond-holders are one party and the
people OF the state are the other pariy.--
The bond holders, I presume have the
greatest means, and can by their means
have on their side the greatest array OF
legal talent that the country can afford.
Whereas the poor, unfortunate, broken
down people are unable TO employ coun-
sci at all, and have to plead their own
cause. Occasionally you will find an
honest lawyer on the side Of the people,
but when you find him you are apt 10 SEQ
poor man, and one that is not avaricious.
Now, do not pretend 10 say that those
men have been feed by the bond holders,
but really il is strange 10 see it almost
without an exception ia this section ofths
country, that the collecting lawyers are
all on the side of the bond holders. A few
years since, the most distinguished meni in
the councils of the nation, were arrayed
in favor of the recharter of the Bank of
the United States, perhaps they were not
suspected at that time of being the attor.
neys OF the Bank, but since, it appears
that they were employees at the tune Of
from forty to sixty thousand dollars each.
Now if men in high station could be thus
operated upon by the bank of the United
States, for the purpose Of getting re.
charter, could not some of Mississippi
lawyers BIO wrought upon TO
undertake 10 argue the Bond question
before the great jury composed of the peo-
'Ie of Mississippi, in order to convince
hem that they are illegally and morally
pound" TO pay the Bonds? Could they
'oi at least, be induced TO argue The single
'olnt that ,ho State was 'estoppei' from
now refusing 10 pay by their sanction of
he bank. heard a legal gentleman
argue this question not long since. and he
irged tho doctrine Of "estepped" with
great zeal, it appeared TO be the only pc.
ilIoa he could assume, "thal the State
vas estoppel," and really from what L
Ieard previous to the speech of this getle.
nan expected TO hear something new IN
ivor OF paying the bonds; he said that he
had studied the question wei, had made
thorough examination Of il in all its
earrings, and that he believed he had sc.
notions and arguments that were wholly
nanswerable," and when we come to
ear these "notions and arguments" il was
ly three hours speech upon the doc.
inc of "estopPel." | think the gentle-
an will fEd at the November election,
lat the people will say that they are no.
stopped" from refusing TO pay the bonds
That they will say they are not "estop-
'd' from refusing to sanction palpable
olation OF the constitution, by which,
ey are known as a body polite, and
ader wbich.they expect their rights to be
'otected-that they will say that they
e not "estopped" from saying tina, they
III refuse TO pay money which has beea
rrowed in fraud Of the constitution, and
wandered in riot and luxury, by few
oxen SPECTATORS and Bank Directors.
NUMA.