The daily exchange. [volume] (Baltimore, Md.) 1858-1861, 1860-09-21

TIE 4n0ican of yesterday, reverting to what
it persists in calling the extra dividend" ques-
ton, undertook TO compress the whole gist of
''lhis controversy into practical and comprehen-
'tsible form" A word or two by way of reply
is necessary, because, we never expect to change
cur opinions upon this subject while we are capa-
Bile of understanding the meaning of the terms
honor and fair-dealing, we desire to place our
views fully as well as fairly upon record THE
EXCHANGE has failed to establish" says Tie
AmGrjcan, "either that any injustice has been
''done TO one portion Of the dividend scripholders
Cor any preference extended 10 another and more
Favored portion;' and our contemporary adj
yances two propositions, in which it seems to
think it has really compressed 'the whole
'gist of this controversy" In the first
place, it assumes that the officers of the
Company, TO whom we alluded, had no in
tention Of preferrng themselves, because, if
we understand Alright what it rather intmates
than asserts they expected TO pay all the creditors
in full. "Wth the withdrawal of the city and
Estate, the last obstacle TO the payment of the
dividend interest would have been removed
and if no other injunction had been applied for
the Company would have gone on to pay the
whole Of the interest. We are left, therefore, TO
infer that the Company had no reason to an
tcipate any application for new iniunc-
ton. Tie AmDican, with lis usual facility,
ignores altogether the all-mportant facts
bearing upon this point When Mr.. DULANY
in his letter of July goth, explained why the ar
rangement between the Company and the City had
been concluded with such unseemly haste he said
he 'knew that there was an opposition 10 the en-
ftre scheme of the dividend, and any settlement
'of it by arrangement he knew that the persons
engaged in this opposition chad the power. if
'tme permitted it, to prevent the proposed set
tlement-and he expressly asserts that "the |
''counsel behalf of the City, the State and
"the Company were equally apprehensive of the i'm
eminent danger of delay and that he feared the
'whole scheme would have been destroyed by ad-
verse legal action of third parlies'' if he had
waited until the City Council could authorize him
TO abandon the proceeding it had formerly direct
ed him to institute. What Mr. DULANY and |
the counsel for the Company knew Mr.. GAR
RETT knew also. He and his friends antici- |
pat5d like Mr.. DULAYY another Injunction. They |
expected to be prevented from paying the balance |
of the claims against the Company, for which they
failed 10 make provision in July. When, therefore.
with this knowledge and anticipation, men of
business and intelligence like those in question,
still took notes for their own shares, payable on
the 10Th Of September, it is childish to suggest |
that they did not intend and expect these notes |
TO be paid on that day-iniunction or no
Observation-Disclosures might be the fate of
those who had no notes. But "even had there |
'becn, The american goes on TO say, "an inten-
'tion TO give certain parties notes and withhold
them from others, the carrying out Of such pur-
pose would have been impossible, and that is the
"best evidence it was not designed" The late dis
closures have proved, itthinks that "such process
could not have been carried on secretly !" and the
logical deduction from this is, that Mr. GARRETT
could not have meant to do wrong, which was so
likely TO be detected. We'need do no more than
call attention to the extraordinary character of
this plea. We commend it to the notice of the
next individual who is called on to explain his
acts and motives in the Criminal Court If he |
will but refer to the we'll known vigilance of the |
police, and the probability of his being found |
out rs evidence that he could not have intended |
TO commit any offence Judge BOND will be COM
pelied to acquit him instantly
But the second point made by The american is |
even less plausible than the first 'The iniunc-
'hon having been applied for,n it tells us that |
all parties still stand on the same ground, and |
''are equally sufferers" In other words, Mr.. |
GARRETT little plan fell through, and therefore,
1t does not matter much whether it an honest |
one or not Being caught in the act he is Will
ling to forego the advantages he had hoped TO
reap. Being followed with Chine and cry by
the public as the nature of his proceedings
was known, he agrees to abandon his scheme and
abstain from negotiating the il-gotten securities,
he had obtained To this admirable resolution
We do not object. Restoration and repentancga are
commendable in gentlemen who have forgotten to |
regard other peoples rights when looking after |
their own interests But we cannot admit that |
the course which Mr.. GARRETT and his friends are |
now content to take, has anything whatever to do |
with that which they deliberately adopted and at
tempted! to follow out two months ago. We will |
not comment further upon The Americaa's logic |
Or It's ethics. Having, in our judgment now for
titled our view Of this question upon all material |
points, we desire to leave it, at all events |
Tor some time to come. In placing the whole mat
ter clearly before the public We have simply dis
charged duty, and if in so doing, we have had |
occasion to speak somewhat plainly of the
implicated parties, it has only been because |
we could not avoid it. We have, however, been |
animated by no disposition either to give unncccs-
sary pain ourselves to see it inflicted by Others,
and we do therefore feel some regret that Mr. GAR
RETr and his friends should have been subjected to
the needless and CALLING modification of having |
such defence as The american has made for them |
paraded before the public.