The weekly clarion., 1873-04-03

| merit within a reasonable length of Tins
| after their issuance, such warrants are deat
| because they import on their face an otiiga-
tion to pay. which il pledgin9 the credit o
| the State in aid of q corporation l role
| that Subsidy is a gift. and that like all other
| gifts, it is nullity in law, until completely
| executed. That the warrants, standing a.
these did, that they were for railroad sub
-idy under that act. being 50 stated by my
| direction to the Auditor, were mere pro-
mise to complete gift, and that Tor rms
| reason and because OF special prohibition
| in the Constitution, 10 SUIT upon thFil
| against the State can be maintained, paftlc-
ularly in the hands Of assignees TO whom
| they NAV ave been assigned as negotiable
| paper.
/ o. When YOU advised the Auditor ofPub-
| lie Accounts that he would be justified ~
| Issuing the warrants to the Ripley Railroad
| Company did you or not intend or direct
| the State Treasurer not 10 accept them for
/ dues to the State?
| A was not asked about that by the
| Treasurer or anybody else, and the matter
/ was in no way brought or suggested TO my
| attention until some three or four weeks
! afterwards, when | did so advise him. |
/ should have done so sooner had / been ask
/ ed about it, | know of no dues 70 the State
| that the Treasurer was at that time author
! lied to receive in warrants OF any KIND
! Had there been at that time money in the
/ Treasury subject to The Subsidy appToprla-
| ton, the Treasurer would have been safe II
| paying on presentation of the warrants and
| consequently as money IS money, he might
| have been safe in taking them up for dues.
| if there were any, and iii lieu OF paying out
| the money.
Q. Did you or not know that at the late
Of the issuance of the warrants referee 10,
that state warrants for certain purposes
could be paid into the Treasury:
a. By Tax Collectors, after they had set
lied with the Auditor and got a pay war
rant, they could. suppose. II WoHld nave
been at the peril OF the Tax Collector CT
Treasurer. if Subsidy warrants had cot IA
there by that means. because every Subsidy
warrant had notice on its face. placed here
by my direction, Of he facts which in my
Judgment, make them unconstitutional ana
and void except for the sole aud exclusive
purpose Of drawing out of the Treasury
the identical appropriation = hlch the sub
sidy Act on its face purported IL make.
q. You state that warrants by certain
officers OF the State could be paid into the
Treasury; knowing this tact. did you not
feel called upon, as the law officer O. the
State, to put the State Treasurer on his
guard. and to advise him ot the uncoH~ritu-
tiOHaity Of the warrants, 80 a. To prevent
the State from suffering los-2
A. | did nos. / did not feel called upon,
because | was not called upon.
IT Is NOT MY BUSINESS TO VOLUNTEER
my opinions to state officers. / assume that
when they want my opinion they VII ash
ipF IL III the manner IuintCa OUT bt tHC
statute. When they DO 50, / always give
my opinion. When they do not. / assume
that they have satisfactory opinions of their
own; besides, the Officer, and not the State.
runs the risk III such 4 case And besides,
the opinion | gave the Auditor was o. file
in his office for the information OF the Trea-
surer as well as Tor The Auditor. and is was
published. soon after it was given, in the
newspapers | am of the opinion il was; if
it was not, it should have been.
tAI.4 ri,.tfI
called at tiie Auditors office previous to the
issuance OF the warrants and directed, when
application was made for their Issuance.
that the matter be referred 10 you, or that
y"u desired to investigate it before they
sied?
A. | did not. 1t was suggested to ne TO
Sue out an Injunction to restrain their issu
ance, and was informed at the same time
that the applicants were in town. Knowing
that Mr.. MusgrOye. the Auditor. had not
returned from New York, | went into the
uditor's office. and asked Mr.. Brown. the
Deputy Auditor, if application had been
made. tie said it had not. | asked him if,
in the event application should be made to
him in MusgrJVe's absence, would he issue
them. lie said he certainly should hot. ]
told aim that thought
Ills HEAD WAS VERY LEVEL,
meaning thereby, that | thought he was
right in not doing so. | told him thought
that if | We're in his place | should nos take
the responsibility in The absence OF his prin
cipal. | told him that III ught that there
was considerable doubt and difficulty
about the business, and that expected that
the matter wenid probably be referred to
me tor investigation, by Musgrove, when he
should return, and that it ought To be thor
oughly Investigated, or words TO thar effect.
Testimony OF Capt. o. &. French,
Ghc Chairman of the Railroad
Committee.
HE PROVES THAT COL. MANN, WHO PAID THE
$500 RETAINER, REQUESTED HIM TO
CALL ON THE ATTORNEY GEM
ERAL FOR HIS OPINION.
THE MILK IN THE cocoANUT,
To General Lowry:
q. State. If you please, how you came t.
address the note to the Attorney General.
At what date; if at the ins stance of the Rail-
road Committee, or any other person or per-
sons?
A. A bill was introduced proyiding for
the repeal of the Subsidy Act, and referred
to the Railroad Committee. Colonel Mann,
Vice President Mobile and Northwestern
Railroad, brought me, as Chairman of said
Committee, the opinion of Judge 1erger on
the constitutionality of the act donating
or selling lands to the railroad and stated
that he would like the opinion
OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL
on the Subsidy. Upon the meeting of the
Railroad Committee. | submitted 10 them
the propriety of asking for the same; and
upon their direction, made written appllca-
ton to the Attorney General for his opin
ion, and further action on the bill deferred
till the opinion was obtained. The applica-
tiou bears date January 9th, 1872.
To Judge Morris:
Q. How long after sending me the note
before you received my answer, and was II
not the hack of y0ur note
A. Can't recollect; it was very soon after
wards, the day or the day following. Tie
opinion was endorsed on the back. There
is no date to the answer.
Judge Norris Recalled.
State if
THE DRAFT
now shown you. is the original drawn by
w. ID. Mann, Vice President, which was
paid to you according TO its date and tenor
for counsel fees:
A 1t is.
The following is a
TRUE COPY
of the original draft referred TO in the fore
going interrogatory and answer. which ori-
ginal was in the possession of this Commit
tee, tO-wit:
GREENS BANKING OFFICE.
Late First National Bank ct Jackson,
JAcko-N. Mss. jar. 10, 1872.
$500.
-At sight. pay TO the order of j. 5.
Morris. FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS
600 00) in u. ). Currency value received
and charge TO account counsel fees.
w. ID. MANN.
Vice President.
John H. Garner. Treasurer.
No. -, Mobile, Ala.
ENDORSED.
J ). Morris.
J. B. Mcmillan, Esq,
J. & T. Green.
.Ino. b. Mcmillan, Cashier.