Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1868-12-22
and racy concealed in that transac-
ton. BY the act Of February 16,
1866, 1t is provided chat the

ana racy concealeu III tndt tfdnrsc- Z
ton. By the act Of February 16, 9
1866, it is provided Chat the .
funds now in the custody of the l
Governor, Secretary of State, and 1
Comptroller, in the form and known
as United States seven-thirty bonds :
or securities, invested under an act |
Of the General Assembly, and I
amounting to the sum Of s61S,250,
with allthe interest thereon accrued
and accruing, and declared as
part Of the perpetual school fund
by an act of the General Assembly,
shall continue to be held as common
school fund, and shall never be di-
minished, as provided in chapter IL,
section 10, of the constitution of the |
State of Tennessee" The section
of the constitution to which refer
ence is here made, provides that the
principal of the common school
fund "shall never be diminished 4
by legislative appropriation and |
the interest thereof shall be invari
ably appropriated to the support |
and encouragement of common
schools throughout the State, and for
the equal benefit of all the people |
thereof; and no law shall be made
authorizing said fund or any part
thereof to be diverted to any other
use than the support and encourage
ment Of common schools" Now
mark the hypocrisy Of the men
who professed to be setting aside
the proceeds of the gold re-
| covered from the Bank of Tennes-
see, "with all the interest thereon
accrued and aecruing," as common
school fund that should ''never be
diminished" In the very same act,
| (Feb. 16, 1869 these thirty
bonds, which were in the custody of
the Governor, Comptroller, and
Secretary of State, were to "be re.
tanned and placed in the hands Of
the Treasurer of the State of Ten
nessee, as part ofthe common school
fund, originally deposited in the
| Bank of Tennessee" Then by the
act of May 26, 1866, authority was
conferred on the Treasurer to depos
post this perpetual fund" in
the Tennessee National Bank of
Memphis. Why did the Legislature
which took these bonds from the
Governor, Comptroller, and Secre-
tary of State, and placed them gin
the hands of the Treasurer of the
STATE of Tennessee" clothe the
Treasurer with the authority con-
ferred on him by the act of May &c,
g 1866? Wonder if Mr.. Rutter could
not make some revelations in regard
| to this matter? He says that "some
| Of the State authorities, deeming it
imprudent that so large a fund
should remain" in his bank, "a COM
mittee was, at the suggestion of the
Governor, appointed by the
Legislature to withdraw said
funds, and $4,000 of the
same was accordingly withdrawn. I"
RI 1t has been understood that only
, about 100000 was secured by this
committee, $4,000 less than re-
ported by Mr.. Rutter. Who can
tell how this ISL Mr.. Rutter claims
that "the State has received fifty
, nine per cent of its claim in each, "
and that twenty-five per cent more
, "will shortly be in the hands of the
| proper authorities" This makes
, eighty four per cent of the original
amount or principal of the bonds
which the State has already re-
ceivcd and will shortly receive.
This would leave only about $780,
: 900 due, exclusive of the interest
due on the bonds. But Mr. Rutters
figures do not bear out this state
ment. He claims to have paid over
$4,000 in cash and $4,000 in
Tennessee bonds, making S36S,OOO,
and then he says he has $62, 800 in
cash which "will shortly be in the
hands of the proper authorities"
These amounts show that there is
still due the State on account of the
principal of the bonds 1890;
and to secure this, and the interest
on the bonds, he claims to have
$4,000 in available property and
bills receivable, and the State still
holds the securities of the bank for
f / 100000, which are now in suit. "
This is a pretty good showing for
the Tennessee National Bank of
Memphis. But the Memphis Ap-
| neal has been looking into this
statement, and gives the following
as It's conclusions: "And first, as TO
the 100000 security From an
examination Of the court records,
we find that the persons standing
pledged to the State in that amount
refuse to surrender it, or that it
shall in any sense be considered rs
protecting the school fund They
say they pledged themselves jointly
in that amount to protect the State
against fraud upon the part Of the
bank and its officers, only so far as
the fiscal fund of the State
was concerned. True, the, dis
pute has been carried to the