Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1874-12-23
ESTHER, THE BEAUTIFUL QUEEN, .
OPERA HOUSE, TONIGHT.
THIS IS THE CLOSING NIGHT.
SECURE RESERVED j.. A a BROS
dec3n
OPERA HOUSE. II
AFTER FIFTEEN MILLIONS.
The Great Nashville Cotton Case
Facts Of Interest 90 Planters who
Sold Cotton 90 Go North During the
War.

The Great Nashville Cotton Case
Facts Of Interest 90 Planters who
Sold Cotton 90 Go North During the
War.
Under an act of Congress passed during
the war regulating the commercial inter-
course between the North and South, the
Secretary Of the Treasury issued set Of
regulations requiring certain Treasury sf-
ficials throughout the South to demand and
collect four cents per pound on cotton as a
condition of permit to be granted for its
shipment. The instructions also required
the seizure, detention and confiscation of
all cotton which should be shipped with
out such permit and payment. Under
these regulations it is said that about
S15,OO0,OO0 was collected and turned into
the Treasury. This, it will be seen, is
distinct from the internal revenue cotton
tax Of three cents. Claims have been filed
to have this tax Of four cents pound re-
funded, upon the ground that the law under
which 1t was collected was unconstitu
tional.
The first step taken toward judicial de-
cision Of the question was an action
brought by Andrew Hamilton, Francis Bes-
sicks, and Nathaniel 4. Griffin, as A. Ham
ilton & Co., Of this city, against Joseph r.
Dillin, in the Circuit Court of Davidson
county. The defendant was the Treasury
officer who collected the tax Of plaintiffs,
amounting to S2Sl, 460.S4. 1t was an ac-
ton Of asusmpSit, wherein the damages OF
the plaintiffs were laid at $4,000. On
motion Of the defendant, it was removed
by certiOFari to the Circuit Court of the
United States for the Middle District Of
Tennessee. judgment was rendered for
defendant, and the case was taken to the
Supreme Court of the United States by a
writ of error, where it is now pending, and
where it was argued about two weeks ago.
Concerning this suit the Washington COR
respondent Of the Ne1r York Sun writes !:
sAfter the decision in the lower court
combination was formed to purchase the
claims of the planters who, learning that
an adverse decision had been made in the
Circuit Court, sold ont for a song. But
the purchasers were confident that judy
ment favorable to their scheme would be
reached in the Supreme Court in the test
case of Hamilton against Dillin. If it
turns out that their confidence was not
misplaced, they viii gather in $4,000, 900,
which should go to the impoverished plan
ters. have heard the charge that much
misrepresentation was resOrted to for the
purpose Of inducing the planters to sell
their interest; and to such of them as may
| find themselves 10 have been so misled, it
may be well to point out provision in the
law to prevent frauds upon the Treasury,
approved July 20, 1853, which says:
That all transfers and assignments here
after made Of any claim upon the United
States, or any part or share thereof, or in
terest therein, whether absolute or condi-
! tiOnal, OF whatever may be the cOnsidera-
ton therefor, and all powers Of attorney,
order, or other authorities for receiving
payment OF any such claim, or any part o.
share thereof, shall be absolutely null and
void, unless the same shall be fully made
and executed in the presence Of at least
two attesting witnesses, after the allow
ance of such claim, the ascertainment of
the amount due, and the issuing of a war
rant for the payment thereof.
'If the decision Of the Supreme Court
should be in favor Of the claimants, any
persons who have been induced by fraud
ulent representations 10 sell their claims
for a trife, viii, in the above provision,
find their means of relief"