The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1873-06-04
The Return of the Comptroller-G General
In the Bond Case.

at length the return VI Co'Ip''olle
General Hoge to the order OF, tn
Supreme Court, requiring him t.
show cause why a writ of manda
mus should not issue to compe
him to levy a tax to pay the interes
of certain bonds of the State hello
by Messrs. Morton, Bliss & Co.
The return is. an able document
furnishing an elaborate and ex'
haustive presentation of the various
strong points of the defendants
case, and seems to be as conclusive
as it is clear and forcible.: So i'm
pregnable are its positions in the
view of our friend Of the Caroli'ai-
an, that he expresses the fear that
the Court will dismiss the case
without ordering an investigation
into the condition of the public
debt, and thus postpone consum-
nation which would rid the State
of an alleged fraudulent debt of
s7,1ei,7oo. We suppose, however,
that the people Of the State would
be very willing to accept this alter
native, and with the pledge which
the State Government has given in
this matter, to leave the solution of
the difficulty to some future action
of the State Legislature. The fact
that the plaintiffs would be de-
feated upon grounds of their own
choosing, and that their efforts here
would be efeetual only to elicit
from the State authorities a strong
protestation against the payment
of a. fraudulent debt, would in itself
be o decided step to the reputation
Of that debt. We are glad to see
that the State Government, speak
ing through the Acknowledgement
has taken q decisive stand in this
matter, and has pronounced that
out of an alleged debt Of $685.
s27.S5, the true debt is less that
amount by s7,191,7oo. Here is a
direct vitalissue made in an author
itative way; and as disposition
has been shown by those in power
to sift the matter to the bottom, we
may safely conclude that the means
will not be wanting to bring about
the desired result.
We append a brief synopsis from
the Charleston Neacs Of the points
presented in the return, which,
however, necessarily fails to do
justice to the logical force and con-
vincing power of the argument
an argument which gives especial
prominence to these three positions
that the Legislature, not the
Comptroller General, is alone au-
thorized to fix the rate of the tax
that even if the Comptroller-Gen-
eral is authorized to do SO there is
9 large fraudulent debt existing,
and he has no sufficient data upon
which to base his estimates-that to
levy the tax would be a nugatory
act, as there has been no appropria-
ton by the Legislature to pay the
interest. The following are the
points more in detail:
Because the authority. to fix the
rate of taxation rests with the Leg
islature, the comptroller having
only to give notice to the county
auditors of the rate fixed by the
Legislature, and the Legislature
has not fixed any rate.
Because, if the respondent had
the authority to fix the rate of taxa
ton to pay the interest upon the
debt, he could not d. so. not having
the requisite data to determine the
actual amount of funds outstand-
ing. :,
current fiscal year, the respondent
has already give notice of the rate
of levy, and has no authority to
give a second notice.
Because, as concerns the levy for
the ensuing fiscal year, any demand
upon the respondent. before the
fifteenth of November next, is pre-
mature and cannot be granted.
Because the Court could not en-
force the payment of the money, if
a lew were made, there being no
appropriation by the Legislature,
and consequently the Judgment of
the Court, in favor of the petition
ers, would be void and nugatory:
Because a registration of all the
bonds of the State has been ordered
10 be made by the Legislature be-
fore any interest shall be paid, and