Lexington union. (Lexington, Miss.) 1838-18??, 1841-07-17

Cages and bonds OF the stockholders was
"the primary condition on which the
faith Of the State twas to be pledged, and
as such constitutes a vital part OF it,"
True, the $40 ckholders did not execute
their mortgages and bonds before the Gov.
ernor executed the State Bonds, as is re-
CURED by the original charter, but they
have subsequently done so. Quere? does
not this perfect the contract as required
by the original charterl But my object
is not to lmplicats any one, but my duty,
my imperious duty, to my constituents re.
quired me to defend their interest; and
to see that they were not unlustly impllcat.
ed in this matter. II is said that the
stock taken is wholly state stock; if so
why is it, that whenever The state attempts
TO do any thing with the bank, that the
stockholders, step in and say "hands off"
end will not permit any thing to be done,
except just such as they may think proper
to dictate: it will be borne In mind that
there was bill introduced into the house
Of Representatives, by Mr.. Besancon, to
put the Union Bank into state Of liqulda-
ton, which hardly reached the table be.
fore II was referred TO select committee,
who reported bill, the very first Section
of which pToposed to exonerate the stock
holders and return to their mortgages and
bonds; thus, so far as the legislature could
involve the States to do so, and let of the
stockholder; and thus saddle the whole
upon the people. And l am at no loss to
account for this singular proposition, for
but few days previous, there had been
meeting Of the stockholders of the Union
Bank; at which, there was much discus.
sion as to what should be done in
the premises; but they ultimately conclud.
ed to petition or rathe say dictate to the
Legislature sayin, that il ,helegislaturc
would release them from all responsibility,
as stockholders, that they would most viii.
lingly return the state bonds, which were
unsold, and give up the bank and all its
assets to the State, now il the stockholders
consider the themselves bound, why res
qulre any act releasing them7 and if the
stock and interest which 10 in the bank,
be wholly state interests; why should
they dictate the terms upon the State shall
receive and mand manage it?
But Gentlemen, that the bonds which
have been sold were executed and sold
under the supplemental act; and although
the act was at first void or could not
pledge the faith Of the State, yet that in as
much as, the agents Of the people have
received the monsy, and the Legislature
have reacted on the subject and having,
in various methods, acknowledged il, by
indirect action, that therefore the people
are bound to pay the bonds; deny that
any agent Of the people has received the
money, or that ore cent Of it has been ap-
in any manner, to the use Of
he State; further, deny tina, any action
of the Legislature, except as is pointed out
ia the Constitution, can, IN any manner,
pledge the path Of the State for one sous;
Tor it is well settled principle in law,
hat it requires the same solemni,ies TO
confirm contract (under seal) that it
1oes to form it, therefore the supplemental
act must 60 through alllhe forms required
BY the Constitution in order that it can
II any manner pledge the faith Of the
State; and there is no man who will have
he hardihood to say that this has been
lore; others argue that shouldsan individ-
raj give special power Of attorney TO
mother to transact piece Of business,
hat although the, attorney should Gnot
conform 10 the letter, yet the principal
IAN confirm the contract by receiving the
proceeds, and going forward to acknowl-
dye and recognise the act Of his attorney,
ither by word or deed. This is true
here being no set form by which an indi-
'idual is bound, but the case has no ANAL
gy when applied to the State; for the
;Iate acts at all times by her agents, and
II her agents are bound by the same
peciaI power Of attorney 1.-THE Constitu-
lonl which is unaltered {; operating at all
ines, under all circumstances and upon
II agents, aud should ninety-nine false
gents attempt to pledge her faith 4 bind
er contrary to the special pO,cer of Gttor.
ey (the cOnstitution) it would be nullity
but this argument operates against the Z
for although their mortgages I
nd bonds were not executed at the time @
,quired by the original charter, they or
part Of them, have subsequently done y
); but as have before said, my object 9
not to implica,e the stockholders, nor
,uId do so, # they are not already inn I
icaied nor if they are bound can the 3
legislature release them, unless, BY tax II
2 the people and paying the deb: /; and o
is will never consent TO do; for il o
Il - L. L.