The Camden journal. [volume] (Camden, S.C.) 1866-1891, 1868-12-17

The authorities in South Carolina
seem to have singular nations as to how
to strengthen the credit Of their State,
if we may Judge by the following pas
seq, of the Governors Message:
II recommend to the Legislature that
some carly action be taken to prevent
the Courts and officers of the Bank OF
the State from wasting and mlsapp'ylng
its assets to tile payment of costs OF
Courts, Attorneys fees, and the salaries
of officers and agents. If the holders
of the Fire Loan Bonds are determined
to pursue the policy of dispar"glng the
credit and resources of the State, when
it must be apparent to them that no
S ate of the Union is more solvent or
has faircr prospect of promptly meet
.nr all her liabilities, they should be
compelled to carry on this litigation at
their own expense. have reason to
believe that not less than sixty thousand
dollars in gld has been squaudered and
made away with for salaries OF ofhcers
and agents who are performing no
necessary duties, fees of attorneys VINO
are employed for the purpose of bring
inc the credit of the State into dlsrepute,
and for other o. jects of equally question
sole propri..ty. The holders of the
Fire Loan Binds should be placed on
the same footing as other creditors OF
the State, anF they should be held
accountable for all damages the State
h g sustained, or may sustain, ny their
unwarrln.aL!c litigation"
One is surprised, ar;ar reading this
illumination, to learn from the state
mcnt of Mr.. Hayne, the coun>e' !: the
party attacked, that the State Is il
debtor in default with It's debt past due;
thnt the Fire Loan Bondholders are
or. .ditors entitled to certain collaterals
pledged by the S'atc when the contract
WIS made iu 1882; that in 1850 the
LcgisIature-tke Bank being lnsoIvent
.onGrmrd the pledges OF 1898, and
appronria;cd the ass:ts Of the Bank OF
the State of South Carolina to the
holders of the bonds, and, 6nalIy, that
all the litigation that has ensned grew
out of suit instituted by the blllhoiders
of the Bunk, brought in 1867, seeking
to set aside the Act of the Legislature
in favor of the bondholders, and claim
ing for themselves these assets which
the bonLho!dcrs Of the Bank simply
defend, and that it has cost little over
$4,000, instead Of 100000. In 1858
the Legislature passed an Act disre-
garding the Act Of 1893, and repeating
that Of 1865, and requiring the Coy
eruor to seize the whole assets OF the
Bank, then deposit in equity, and to
place the funds in the State Treasury.
In the same Act, satisfactory provision
was made for the billhollcrs who began
the litigation, and none for the bond
holders.
1t does seem. rather hard, on these
facts, that people who advanced their
money thirty years ago to hell rebuild
the city of Charleston should be threat
cncd with being made accountable 1oT
call damages the State has sustained
by their unwarrantable litigation" we
do not pretend to 90 into the merits OF
the case, but suggest that these merits
be left to the courts, and that common
prudence would suggest distant bond
holders, waiting for their money, long
past due, at a time too when the Gov
ernor tells them that ono State in the
Union is more solvent" should be made
to feel that every facility is afforded
them by the State to defend rights
which they at least believe to be
doubted. South Carolina cannot at
ford either as a matter of money or
character, to dama.e its opening career OF
prosperity by any other course, The tact
is, too, that the holders of the bank-blIls,
forwhosc beueft this extraordinary inter
ference with tie action of the courts is
talked of, have bought them up for about
eight cents on the dollar, and we lear
are adding another to the number OF
"rinss" by which the country is now In
fested.-Ndtion.
The RUMoRED PURCHASE OF CUBA.