The daily phoenix. [volume] (Columbia, S.C.) 1865-1878, 1872-12-06

| IfeA8nfAr9
as prayed in the complaint. be, and the same
ID hereby, made perpetual.
HE BLUE RIDGE REVENUE BOND ScR1p-
DoCToRs DIsAaREE.-E. @. MoLure. Eeo..
editor OF tho Chester Reporter, who has. an.
parently, examined the subject thoroughly.
thus replies to tho structures of o cotempo.
rary:
We did not enter into tho rea sons which lad
tne LEGISLATURE to pledge the faith and funds
of any contracts made by the Blue Ridge
ltaiir0ad Company, and to make it the duty OF
the Comptroller! to endorse on the
funds OF tho State were 80 pledged: We did
not think it necessary for the purpose OF our
reniArks. nor do we now think 80. Itan}fices
to Say, that tho bonds were 80 endorsed. the
IN the hands ct the of1icera OF the COMPANY.
But our friend say. (if wo do not misunder.
stand him) the mction OF the LccisIature
therein was void, being in violation Of the
constitution, q power superior to the Legiela.
tuTe." No|, wherein wes tho Constitution
violated2 LII what article or section ia it writ
Ten that the Legislature shall not pledge the
pnbo SHse hs II aid Of gre.,
Convention did pass an ordinance, March Is.
iS0S. Ihat al Acts or pretended Aots OF
,eglsiaton Ss puTporting to have been passed by
December, A: D. 1860. pledgingIthe faith and
| credit OF tho State, etc., are hereby suspended
and declared imperative, until the General
This did rot affect the Blue Ridge Railroad
Company. The first Act authorizing the
guaranty OF its bonds was passed in 1854. for
81 O0o 200. The Act OF 1868. declaring certain
impossible and lnjudicious, re.enacts the au.
thorlty to guarantee one millions OF bonds.
and then in Section authorizes the guarantv
OF three millions additional: Was THIS uncon-
stltutlonal2 Our friend will recuIlect that in a
suit before Judge Melton, the Act authorizinp
the endorsement OF the four millions OF Blue
Ridge Rsiroad bonds was called in question.
and that he decided i'll favor OF the Act. How
easy and proper it would ave- been for him
hen to have declared it unconstitutional had
| it been 20. But he did not
The chief condition imposed by tho Act was
| that tho bonds were not to be sold except at
par or Ia exchange for United States socuri-
ties. The act docs not use the word .'sold. !"
but such Is the implication. The bonds were
| not sold by tho officials or the railroad com
i, pany Tor less y than par, nor exchanged; they
could not sell nor exchange them on those
terms; Int they did plodgo or hypothecate
| them az collateral security for money Dor.
Io%eu ior the uses OF The road. Tho Lesisla-
,nro miHnt VOL have held that this was IN
evasion of tho Act; but, at the Same time, the
Legislature certainly had tho power 10 ,outre
tue conditions it had previously imposed. aud
TINS IT. did by tho Act authorizing the issue Of
tonstitu:ionality, was the latter Act authoriz-
ING Tho bond scrip. as u financial nrranso-
hlrht. oil aDsurdity," ''palpabio fraud"
or one calculated to highly benefit tho tax.
paying portion OF tho peopt2 We hold that
IL could not but inure to their benefit, what
ever might have been tho motives Of the I.e-
Slsimtnre IN passing the Act; with those, We
have, just now, nothing to do. The bonds
With accrued interest, payable in gold
unted at tho tinlo or the substitution OF
tn; scrip to 81 Soc. 900; this sum was settled
| or compromised with Fl 800, 600 fbond scrip
clear reduction OF the liabilities Of tn State
to the amount OF S3.U00,00O. Should not the
tho bonds are Cancelled, even by the isspe OF
l.sOO 900 OF scrip? But our friend SAYS that
the greater portion OF tho bonds were hypo-
thccstetl tor tho comparatively triiling loan
of $i00 000." Has ho not missed tho IA CTS
widely? Only $iD3, 600? Why, Patterson. the
President Of the road, in his sworn answer 10
suit, returned the amount as betweon
$70O.0JO and $500. 900? And then there was
Stecrs large contract, made in 1869 for
fi,00O 0OO, and which he might legally have
| clnimed, as his failure to carry it out resulted
from no default Of his, but OF the company.
anu WHICH WAS compromised ut $3.50 900
making over 81 900 900, instead of 400 900 re-
ceiVod by the company by tho endorsements of
tmo State OF it's faith and fund" on its houds.
VAS there no moral or legal obligation rost-
ilR upon mo Slate to repay money 30 obtain
ell upon her credit? We think there was
even under tho provisions of the Act. and il
we 90 not mistake our friend, lie admi,s il To
| tho amount of Si0u, 900.
| 80, then, II tho State was legally and mo.
raily bound To the amount OF 81 900 900. the
sc!ip 10 that amount was Il settlement OF that
luicDtCuneSS, aud W. have LOFT 81 500 600 of