The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1870-05-02
TIE CITY DEBT.
The Credirors In Court-An Interesting
Argument Judge Carpenters Deci-

Argument Judge Carpenters Decf
sion.
IN THE COURT OF COMMON PLsAs-sEpoRE Hi
HONOR JUDGE CARPENTER.
Francis ]. Pelzer, George Cameron. George A
Trenholm, and others, vs. George w. Williams
John Gibbon, George E. Glbbon. VIM. L. weoo
and A. Mcdowell Brown, executors OF Georg
Gibbon.
This was an action to enjoin the defendant
from taking certain assets, pledged to certain
creditors, OF whom, by arrangement with the city
authorities, were the plaintiffs; and further to re
strain them from the enforcement Of their judg
ment against the assets Of the city. The bill o.
the complainants, which was filed several days
ago, has been published In TIE NEWS.
D. T. Corbin. Esq, appeared for the city. He
said he had not deemed 1t advisable to make
ans wer to the BILL because he regarded this as an
application for preliminary injunction only. II
the injunction should lie, he would, at the proper
time, consider the answer to be made. He would
however, move to set aside the attachment on
certain specific funds Of the city-frst, because
the same was irregular and contrary to law, and,
| secondly, because the property, being public In
| It's character and dedicated to certain public
| uses was not subject to attachment That at.
achment had crippled all the operations OF the
city government The llfe-blood OF the city had
we'll nigh stopped It's circulation, and Its finances
were seriously embarrassed
Hon. B. F. punkin remarked that, in his
opinion, the point submitted comprchended the
whole question, namely, whether Judgment credi-
tors have right to levy upon public property,
under authority ofthe act.
General James Simons here filed certificate,
showing the amount OF stock owned by the credi'
tors represented By him.
TIE ANSWERS.
Mr.. Phillips, counsel for the executors OF George
Gibbon, then read his answer to the court as fo!.
lows:
The City Council OF Charleston, G. W. Williams,
and j. Gibbon, G. E. Gibbon, ". L. Webb and
a. Mcdowell Brown, executors OF G. Glbbon,
ads. F. ]. Pelzer, ]. S. Gibbs and others.
The defendants, John Gibb0n, G. E. Gibbon, W..
L. Webb and Andrew Mcdowell Brown, eXecu-
tors OF George Gibbon, deceased. upon whom has
plant, and OF the injunction thereto appended,
come by their attorney, John Phillips, and answer
thereunto, and say:
First. They neither deny nor admit that the
OF Charleston. They admit the City Of Charleston
is a body corporate by the name and title OF "The
CITY Council OF Charleston" and was first tncor-
porated by act Of the General Assembly, A D.
lTS3 which act has, from time to time, been
amended; but whether the amendments are
correctly recited, these defendants neither admit
nor deny.
ell OF Charleston have from time to time, lawfully
contracted debts by borrowing money and other
wise and have Issued stocks and other securities
as the evidence thereof; but whether the same
amounted to nearly the sum OF five millions OF
dollars, or more or less, on the 11th day or Au-
gust, A. D. 1851, they cannot undertaketo say.
Third. The stocks, which these defendants re-
present and hold as executors oil the estate OF the
late George Gibbon, deceased, and upon which
they have recovered Judgment and levied eXecu-
tlori, were purchased by him In his life time, and
as they understand and believe at par value prices
as follows: To wit $40. 900 purchased between the
9th day OF November, 1S4S, and the third day OF
January, 1s49, inclusive; $500 purchased on the
2Sth day of July, 1854, being stock created In pur
suance Of an ordinance passed the l4th day OF Oc,
tober I84S entitled IAN ordinance TO authorize
the issue OF per cent. stock on the faith Of the
City OF Charleston to redeem the issue Of 5000 900
OF 6 per cent. stock, under ordinance ratified 5th
November, 1885," and s24o purchased January
ordinance passed the 21st June, 184S-the whole
amounting to s40 740 oil OF which city stock be-
came due and payable on the 5th day OF EoVem.
ber 1868, and FOR which the City Council Uf
Charleston actually received the full par value In
good money, equivalent at the respective dates to
SO much money In gold coin.
tl.
tator knew Of the ordinance OF the 11th Of August
1857, and that he refused to have his stock ar
ranged according to Its provisions.
Fifth. They do not admit that the said ordl-
nance creates mortgage OF the stocks OF corpo.
rate companies, held by the City Council ex-
clusively, to secure payment OF the city debt re.
arranged Hereunder, In preference to other city
debts. But, II it be so, 1t In no wise anects the
interests OF these defendants, as will hereafter
fully appear.
Sixth. These defendants deny that the City
..zlS- let, ,nI,v N
resources held by the City Council, their power
OF taxation included are ample for payment OF
the city debt; and the allegations OF insolvency
Is made In the interest OF the debtors ana TAX
payers, aud not OF creditors. The rellel the.
plaintiffs seek Is relief for the debtor not pro-
lection Of the creditor.
Seventh. Whether the plantifrs are creditors OF
the city as they ase or ney ars Of
tne city debt, or whether they are creditors IN
less and taxpayers In greater degree, these de-
PENDANTS do not undertake to say, because 1t Is
not necessary to their defence and 70 tne protec-
ton OF their rights.
Eighth. These defendants say that the City
Council falling to pay their debt at maturity, and
falling also to make any provision Tor Its pay
cred Judgment, and the City Council agail falling
to paw and In fact refusing TO accept fair, ltber-
al, aud to them very advantageous terms Of pay
ment, these defendants issued execution and
levied upon - shares OF the Gas Company and
upon the city funds or credits In the First Nation
al Bank aud Peoples National Bank, and In the
possession OF the City Treasurer.
Ninth. Thathaving ascertained that the prop
er;y funds and credits OF the City Council In said
banks are ample for the satisfaction OF their exc
cutiOn, they have withdrawn their levy upon the
shares OF Gas Company stock, and upon lunus
and property in the hands OF the City Treasurer,
and there Is no further cause Of complaint to the
plaintiffs against these defendants because that
it is rot and cannot be alleged that the property
funds and credits in said banks are other than
legal assets subject to said levy In satisfaction OF
their execution and levy.
These defendants pray that the Injunction
granted upon er pdTte statement may be dissoly-
ed. That the First National Bank and the People 9
Bank of Charleston be ordered to satisfy the said
execution out OF the funds levied upon and ad-
mItted to be In their possession by the returns OF
their respective cashiers, and that these deien.
dants be hence dismissed, with their costs and
charges.
G. L. Buist, Esq, counsel for G. W. Williams,
then presented his answer, to wit:
George ". Williams, one Of the above-named
defendants, answering the compliments. says:
/. That the firm OF George W. Williams Co.,
which is composed OF himself and five others, and
engaged In an extensive and varied business, In
the Cities Of Charleston and New York, some time
since became the owners OF an amount OF twenty
one thousand eight hundred and ten ISL, ,8lo)
dollars six per cent. stock Of the City Of Charles.
ton, which became payable and redeenabe on
the first days Of June and October, eighteen hun.
dred and sixty eight. That when the said stock
became payable and redeemable, the said arm ap-
piled to the City Council OF Charleston for the pay
Impossible at that time to pay the principal, put
,hot anortc ronId no adn m efYpNt a SattlamRnt