Knoxville daily chronicle. [volume] (Knoxville, Tenn.) 1870-1882, 1871-08-10
Information Wanted.

MEssRs. EDITORS: The object of this
communication is to elicit information.
Blount county subscribed $4,000 in aid of
the Knoxville and Charleston Railroad,
and paid the same in her coupon bonds,
running thirty years and bearing 8 per
cent. interest. Had these been judiciously
and honestly applied to the purpose for
which they were intended, the people of
the county would have realized, in the en-
hanced value of their lands and in the in
creased facilities for trade and travel, pc
cuniary benefit corresponding with the
heavy burthen which they had imposed
upon themselves by the issuance of said
bonds. But it is said that this has not been
done; that the officers of the Knoxville
and Charleston Railroad Company sold
$50, 900 of Blount county bonds to Joseph
A. Mabry, on a credit, and without any
security; that subsequently he executed a
note to the Company for the purchase
money, with Geo. w. Mabry as security !;
that said note thus executed was sued on
in the Circuit Court for Knox county and
that a few days since the Receiver, Presi-
dent and Directors of the Company, by and
with the advice of Judge Mckinney, one
of the States Commissioners for the sale
of delinquent railroads, accepted 60 acres
of land, worth only about $4,000, in full
liquidation of said note, which amounted
at the time to 81 ,255.
Now this rumOr may or may not be true.
If true, the people desire to know it, and
to know by whom and under what au-
thOrity the contract was concluded. If
not true, these inquiries will enable the
parties implicated to give it an authori
tative denial. If true, a gross wrong has
been done the public, and there is fault
somewhere. The officers entrusted with
the business of the company, had no right
to invest the bonds issued by Blount cOun-
ty to aid in building a railroad, in lands,
however valuable. But if they had, it is
bad trading to give $50, 900 worth Of Blount
county bonds for So, 600 worth of poor
lands. In this transaction the public loss
is General Mabry's gain. The contracts,
terminating in the result stated, were
all made while he was director of the
company and it is due to the parties as
well as to the public that a full expose
should be made, showing what ha9 been
done and who did it.
1t is also stated that the parties holding
the proxies of Blount and Knox counties,
with a full knowledge Of the foregoing
fact, as far as they had then transpired,
voted for General Mabry for Director of
said Company. Is this true? If so, who
were the proxies representing the counties
and what apology or excuse have they for
their votes? Ine people or Blount ana
Knox counties are forbearing of censure
and just in their conclusions, and they
will wait explanation before passing
judgment on the matter heretofore referr-
ed to.
One other inquiry, Messrs. Editors:
Has a receiver appointed by the Governor
fer the purpose Of preserving the property
of delinquent railroad company, the le-
gal right to waive upon it and convert S2l,-
255 worth of notes into $4,000 of unprO-
ductive real estate? And if he should do
so, may he and his securities not be held
liable for the loss?