Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-04-21

troll and give direction to millions of their
money.
The question raised goes to the root of
the evil and deprives the bondholder of
the protection and defense Of al innocent
purchaser.
In the opinion Of your committee the
innocent purchaser, If such there be, is
franchise law was Incorporated in the face
of the bond.
A brief synopsis of the facts connected
with the history ofthese bonds may serve
to illustrate the relation which they sus-
tain to the taxpayer.
An ordinance providing for the funding
of the city debt was submitted to the
elect under the franchise law of the State,
on the 3Oth Of April, l567-s27 votes were
polled in the First, Third, Fifth and Sew
NTH Wards of the city For Bonds" nc
polls being opened in the other Wards;
I'll votes were polled "No Bonds" Ma
jority for bonds GIG. This on the vote to
fund the city debt.
Under the supposed authorityconferred
by this mOekery of law and justice; bonds
were issuediamounting to 81 ZOO, 900.
The s~peculat0r went into the market
and bought up the evidences of debt
against the city at an average of about
forty-two (42) cents on the dollar. This
is the best approximate estimate your
committee have been able to make, and
it is believed to be very nearly correct.
With his $4,000 the Spectator pur-
chased 100000 of evidences of debt
against the city; he took this to the City
Hall and obtained from your city author
tiles interes : bearing bonds amounting to
$l53, $40, the bonds thus costing him. a
fraction over twentY-seven cents on the
dollar-the city donating to him, without
authority or warrant OF law, a bonus of
xEQ G1R in tho ahann of fpfawaaF kl,-s--
time bonds running from five to thirty
years. 1t will thus readily be seen that
the speeulator paid in cash about S275, 900,
and received forhis handsome investment
Understanding bonds aggregating 81
000, 1000. Such policy and arbitrary ex-
cess of supposed authority, if
long pursued, would bankrupt the
finest ~tax-payiug province that history
gives any account Of and reduce its in
habitants TO misery and want.
The property of the citizen would soon
be consumed by the tax-gatherer and
placed in the Golfers of his lord and mas
ter, the speculator. The cry of repudia-
ton can never justly and legally be made
effective in resisting the efforts of the
overburthened taxpayer to rid himself
from the payment of debts based upon
such considerations.
In relation to the paving bonds your
committee find and report that on the
18th day of June, 1e67, an ordinance pro-
viding for the issuance of these bonds
was submitted to a vote of the elect I'M
der the franchise law, that AS votes were
east for, and "a against issuing these
bonds; that under the assumed authority
conferred by this election, bonds amount
ing to $500, 0l2 were issued, and are now
held as evidences of debt against the CITY.
Your committee are informed and re-
port that a large proportion of the votes
cast at both of these elections were cast
by the cOlored population of your city.
Your committee, in making the inves-
LEGATIONS required, have been aided by
eminent legal gentlemen, some of whom
reside in this city, others reside at your
national capital-all Of whom have spent
much time in examining the questions
arising in this report, and in investigating
the constitutional questions arising under
the franchise law of the State. These
gentlemen concur in the legal opinions
expressed in this report. The questions
presented require grave and profound
consideration. Your committee, there
fore, recommend that steps be taken to
test the legality of the bonds referred to
in this report.
In conclusion, your committee deem it
proper 10 state that they disavOw any
personal reflection upon the character
and motives of any one connected with
the past administration OF your CITY gov
eminent. Their sole object has peer to
arrive at facts and correct legal eonclu-
siOns. JOHN HALLUM, Chm.
o. +. PRESCOTT,
r. P. DUNCAN.
AnriI On Io-O