Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1853-1862, 1854-01-14
THE ISSUANCE OF BONDS TO THE EAST TEN
NrSseE AND GEORGIA RAILROAD. s.s+

,,- articles on this subject have elected replies
en- both the Banner and the True Viag. Thrust
,rs.,e some merriment with the legal profession OF
the State 10 witness with what iaciliy the
of these papers expound statutes Ihey p'c''"'
with a. much self-ass france as II they had rnaoe
themselves masters of all laws OF all the BOOKS whicn
en- ,bs shelves of lawyers. Perhaps the Legsla-
.,,,a ,n,n witnessing the brilliant exhibition they
have made of their profundity, may thihh 1t ausi
III, % constitute them judicial tribunal, to which
.n.sls shall be taken from the decisions OF Execu-
tive officers, so that their legal OPINIONS may NC
had. and that thus all questions OF doubtful c'aiac-
,ar involving the interests oil the otate, may NC
sa,,Ied in manner that will be conclusive ard at
the same time perfectly satisfactory.
For our own part, we have but little to add to
what we have written upon this subject
We have accomplished our main purpose with
the Banner. in driving that paper inside of the act
In its issue of Friday confines itself to the legal
question, without attempting to go outside oil the
act" Had this been its previous course we should
not have felt it necessary to say any thing IN reply
The poiut now raised by the Banner isprecisry the
one covered by the opinion Of The Attorney Geaera'.
In publishing that opinion we stated that we
thought it covered the case and that its arguments
were satisfactory to our minds. Not being "a law
yer anla judge" we were content to leave that
opinion with our readers, without attempting to
enforce its views with any reasoning OF our own
We are still content to leave the question, within
the act where the opinion of the Attorney Gener-
leaves IL at least until our neighbors make some
attempt to show his reasoning unsound. 1t covers
exactly the objection which they raise, and is OF IN
fnitely more weight with US than are their argu-
ments.
We assure the Trets Wing that we have no desire
TO ago off on a side issue" as to the merits OF the
gentleman from Montgomery. Weregard him as
very clever young man. Of vastly greater merits
than the question he has raised possesses Inc
T,us Wigs fears may safely be banished, If Mr.
BAILEY can survive the fattery of that paper, he
may regard himself as proof against anything the
newspapers may say about him. and may sleep peace
fully
We commenced this article only for the pur-
pose Of saving, as we have already said that the
arguments against the issuance OF the bonds IN ques
ton are the very arguments so concluslvey covered
by the opinion of the Attorney General, and to ex
press our surprise that our wing neighbors should
press the point without attempting an answer tc
the Attorney Generals argument. THIS is wha
they have first TO deal with, and we press it upon
their attention The Attorney General is of thei
own party, and he is sustained in his opinion by
other equally eminent wing lawyers, among whom
are Messrs. w. H. SsEED, JOIN H. CRozTER, Judge
GAUT. and others Weinsst that the first thing ou
neighbors have to do is to take up the Attorney
Generals opinion, and show how its reasoning i
ENORMOUS.