The Charleston daily news. [volume] (Charleston, S.C.) 1865-1873, 1872-08-10

of State, in response 10 said order, and for
cause shows
Melton, Judge of the Court of Common Pleas
for the Fifth Circuit, has no power or au-
thority, at chambers, to issue writ OF man
| damus; that the Court of Common Pleas for
| Richland County only: under the provisions OF
section Is, article 8, Of the constitution, has
power to issue writs of mandamus. THIS
respondent, therefore, prays to be hence dls-
| missed, with his reasonable costs IN this De-
| half, wroDgfally sustained.
g. This respondent further shows, that under
| the provisions OF section OF the act approved
March l3, 1872, entitled IAN act relating 10 !he
bonds of the State OF South Carolina" ms
respondent Is not authorized or required 10
afix the seal of the State to any oonos, except
| for the conversion of bonds or stocks already
issued pursuant to law. That upon .inlorma-
ton and belief, this respondent says that the
pretended bonds of the petitioners, for the
conversion of which bonds OF the State are now
sought to be sealed, are not bonds Issued pur-
| suant to law.
5. This respondent further shows, that un-
der the provisions of Section 8 Of the act ap-
proved March l3, 1872. entitled "An act relat-
ing TO the bonds Of the State Of South Caro-
lima" this respondent is not authorized to seal
bonds for the conversion of any bonds OF the
State, ''other than those named In the report
made by the State treasurer, as specified In
oSSA1
authorized under previous laws of the State" !"
That this respondent, upon Information and
belief, SAYS that the bonds held by the petl-
iIpners, for which bonds of the State OF South
carolina are now sought to be sealed Tor the
purpose OF conversion, are not such bonds as
have been authorized under previous laws OF
this State.
4. This respondent, on Information and be-
lief, SAYS that the pretended bonds OF the peti-
tloners have already been once c0nvertedinto
other bonds of the State, under the provisions
of an act entitled San act to provide tor The
conversion Of State securities" approved
March %, 1869; that this respondent has once,
to wit: on or about the lBt day OF June, a. u.
1871, sealed bonds Of the State for this pur-
pose, and this respondent is informed and be-
lieves that the same were duly Issued Cneretor
by the treasurer of the State.
S. This respondent further shows that the
act entitled ssAn act relating to the bonds OF
the State of South Carolina" approved March
49, 1872. ant" the act entitled AN act 10 pro, ;,
vide for the conversion OF State securities"
approved March %. 1869, are contrary to the
constitution, and null and void. sf!-
6. That The petitioners are not authorized
by law to maintain this action and demand,
and have this respondent seal bonds OF the
State for the purpose of conversion for other
bonds or stocks of the State. That under the
pretended law of the State, to Wit: the act
entitled San act to provide for the CONVEX
sion OF State securities" approved March %,
1869, the State treasurer is authorized, only
on application of any person holding coupon
bonds of the Stale of South Carolina, 10 take
up the same and issue in lien thereof stock or
bonds Of said State, and the said State treas
urer only can demand and have this respondent
seal bonds for the said purpose.
Having fully answered said rule, this re-
spondenI prays to be hence dismissed, with
his reasonable costs. CORBIN d MELTON,
Attorneys for Respondent.