Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1869-08-18

Some of our own State papers
nave INDUCED in q discussion of the
probability of Reputation of a
portion of the indebtedness of the
State, incurred on account of aid
extended to certain railroads. This
is wholly unnecessary
and worse than useless. Tennessee
will not tarnish her good name,
and she could not if she would, by
Those who have been
discussing the probabilities of re
pudiation seem to forget, if they
ever knew it, that reputation is an
impossibility. Tho law under
which those bonds were loaned is
laid down in the Code as follows:
1897. These bonds, when iesued, consti-
tute lien upon the section of the road 80
prepared, including the road-bed, right Of
way, grading, bridges, and masonry, upon
all the stock subscribed to such road, and
upon the iron rails, chairs, spikes and
equipments, when purchased; the State
being vested with the lien, without any
conveyance, as a security for the payment
by such company of the interest on such
bonds as il falls due, and of the principal
of the bonds at their maturity.
1898. And upon the completion of the
entire road, the State is invested with
lien without deed, for the purposes men
toned, on the whole road, superstTuciure,
equipments and stock, and upon all the
property owned by the company as incl
dent to or necessary for its business.
1899. Nor can such company, after the
issuance of the bonds for the first section,
create any lien, encumbrance, or mortgage
on any part of the road, or on any portion
of their property, in conflict with or having
priority of the State lien.
This mortgage is made to protect
the State, and of course inures to
the benefit of the holders of the
bonds. But suppose the State should
repudiate them, what then? John
Smith, who holds 100000 of these
bonds, will bring suit against the
railroad company to which they
were loaned, in the name of the
State of Tennessee for his use, to
forclose the mortgage, and thus
compel the payment of his claim, il
the railroad and its fixtures shall be
worth so much. But suppose the
road and the other property GOV,
cred by the lien shall not sell for a
sufficient amount to pay the holders
of the bonds, what are these credi-
tors to do since the State has repu-
dated its liability, and a private
citizen cannot bring suit against the
State ? This question is fully an
swered in a report from the judici-
airy committee submitted to the Sen
ate at the last session of the Legis.
lature in relation to the sale OF
what is known as the "defaulting
railroads" that is, tho roads that
do not pay the interest on the
bonds loaned them. Speaking Of
the proposed sale of these roads, the
committee say:
The committee have said that they
must 90 at some time or other, unless
the policy Of the State, or rather Of hel
legislators, is changed. Now for the
facts and law establishing this PROPOSE
ton Reputation, if resorted to, canno
save them. Suppose the State should
buy them at the sales under the
DEGREES. They are then the property Of
the State, and she may not be willing t.
sell them. Cencede she will not The
committee have shown her enormous in.
| debtedness, and that it is constantly and
rapidly increasing. 1t is admitted that 6
sovereignty can be sued only and in tho
manner in which she may consent to BIZ
| brought before the courts. The eOnsti'
tuition of the State of Tennessee pro-
vides that she may be sued in such man
ner as the Legislature may prescribe
This was giving her consent, should the
Legislature, in its wisdom, prescribe the
manner of doing so. The Legislature
did, at one time, by law, so prescribe,
but a subsequent Legislature repeats
ed this statute, thereby withdraw
ing her consent And, hence, she
cannot be sued in her own courts
Neither can she, since the adoption O
the eleventh amendment of the cOnstitu.
ton of the United States, be sued in the
federal courts by citizens of another
| State, or citizens OF subjects of foreign
government But she can be sued in IN,
Supreme Court of the United States by
another State Most of her bonds are
held by citizens of New York. Now
suppose, by her policy, she becomes SC
| involved as not to be able to pay hel
bonds, interest or principal, all the citi,
zens of New York have to do is to gel
tho Legislature of his State to intervene
and take up the bonds, and then the
State of New York, as it will be heI
duty to do for her people, can bring suit
and recover Judgment in the Supreme
Court of the United States. Upon such
Judgment she can have her execution,
and sell the railroads of the State, and
any other property she may OVID; and il
there be not a suficiency, the Legislature
might be compelled to levy tax suffici-
ent to pay the residue. This is strong
case, but it is not beyond the range OF
probability, if the course Of events do
not change.
Here then it is clearly shown that
if there was a disposition to repu,
date that portion of the Stato's liza
bilities incurred on account of aid
extended to railroads under the
Brownlow administration, it could
not be carried into successful praC
tice. There are, no doubt, a few
men in the State who favor the re-
pudiation of this portion of the
States liability, but the great mass
of the people, the men who pay
the taxes, favor no such wild scheme.
Instead of agitating and advocating
an impracticable policy, which can
only injure the standing and credit
of the State, those who suggest ro-
pudiation as a panacea for the
evils under which we are groan-
ing, should devote their energies to
devising some means to save, If