The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1878-07-18

uiauy JucBG' shooic have become pHblie
property. Trere ID .eomethihg lIcop,pre.
!hensible abott IL, for 1 take II that our
Judiciary, as at present organized. are not
fond of paiading their "views", before The
public upon QUESTION: std:: IL be adjudi.
Gated by tacin.
But TO proceed. Is it prcsumed that
II the Court Of Claims should try the
validity Of these bonds, the Eupien,e
Court would not hove - review their de-
cision2 PctS not the joint resolution.
whicn creates the Court of Claims, dis.
unctly, aud i'll so many words, provide
an appeal from its decision 10 the gu.
preme Court OF the State7
1t is scarcely imagined that The INTEL.
LfaENcER 1 suPposes that If the decision
of the Court Of Claims should be adverse
To the bondholders-shou they ko be-.
fore it--they wolld Be 70 we'll setiefied
With the, result, that they would waive
their fight of appeal. Aud is it within
the widest range Of possibility that the
decision of q cause on appeal from that
Court, would differ from that which
would follow an appeal in similar cause
from any Circuit Court, or from Judge
Mackey'u Circuit Court in particular Z
Certainly no:, and .hc ptcsAmption 10
Unfair in the extreme.
The editorial further charges generally
that these proceedings are ngainst the
policy of the State, because by instituting
them the relators refuse to accent the
Court which has been provided by the
Legislature for the trial of such cases.
There ia nothing in the mandamus cases
which can be construed into such n re-
fIlanl Tho rnl Of 81.
ing proceedings begun before the crea.
ton of this special Court. They are
simply endeavoring to enforce what they
conceive TO be contract, in the manner
established long before Court of Claims
became necessary part Of the machinery
of State government. This Court Mt best
could not avail them. There is no power
given to it to grant writs of mnndaniiis.
II cannot, and the most earnest advocates
OF its htneSS TOR every possible emcr-
gency, in which the consols are con.
cerned, never claimed that It could de-
stroy the jurisdiction of the Circuit Court
in such cases. it utterly fails TO give the
relief required, and no public policy, nor
any other consideration, can require suit
ors to go before Court which cannot.
from it's very Constitution, give them the
TeHleuy WHICH tney seek.
1t seems to have become fashionable
and there must be something very pleas
ant In the fashion---to suppose that be-.
o@as5 oae happens &c have become :he
unfortunate owner of State Bonds, in the
ordinary course of his investment, that
he must sacrifice every legal right attach.
Ing to that ownership to what is termed
q State policy. Surely it does not seem
that Democratic reform necessarily m scans
the surrender of rights which many years
OF invariable custom and practice have
guaranteed and secured.
The questions concerning the tunds
must be decided at some time they must
eventually be decided by the came tribu-
nal (; and as far as regards the State, it
surely cannot be to her hurt to try her
own case before Courts which she has in
stitntcG, whose Benches she has filed,
anu io whom sho delegated Jurisdiction:
in cases like the present long before the
emergency which gave rise to the crea-
tion of new tribunal. It can make
little difference to her, as far as the ;ilti.
mate effect on her finances is concerned.
whether the coupons Of these bonds be
how received for taxes or whather after
an indefinitely prolonged litigation, in
the Court of Claims, that Court should
decide all tho bonds valid. And the in
vestigation can be made as thorough in
one Court as in the other. IF tho object
sought in concentrating all litigation in
the special Court be to gain time, It is
scarcely an argument which the State is
justified IN using against her creditors.
1t is again suggested In the editorial in
question that in order to escape ore-half
of the evil which it is imagined would
Eesu!. irom euch proceedings ~ those re-
Gently, had in this city, the taxes be made
payable In January, so that the July
coupons could not be rendered in paw.
ment Of them. Certainly this is an an.
founding proposition. What would be
thought of an individual who would tbus
endeavor to avoid his contract? Would
such distortioning and disarrangement
OF the circumstances surrounding the
making of it avail him as defence in q
suit to compel specific performance of il ?
Or, even If it would so avail, would the
moral obliquity be any the less e? If we
are to have continuation Of the reform
so grandly begun, by all moans let US
have it thoroughly. Let us so meet the
issues, which must bo decided at some
time, face to face, squnrely and fairly in
the mode which immemorial usage has
sanctioned. And let us not counsel the
State to pursue course which we would
surely condemn If followed by one of her
citizens. If our State is to puy these
bonde. and is to receive the coupons for
taxes, the sooner she begins TO discharge
that obligation the better; and the
knowledge that the obligation is upon
her is the first step towards 8 discharge.
There can be no moro sp. ,dy r'ay in
which for the State to arri, at that
knowledge than that adopted by the
Charleston bondholders.
One word in conclusion upon the "pa-
triOtism" of this affair. In the tender
made &c si;e County Treasurer by th5so
of which the coupons con-
ss!t:se5 &c. :ncPe than one.third part.
were Hampton tax receipts, representing
many hundreds Of dollars, showing that
these gentlemen had not been backward
in the payment of the voluntary percent
age of tax authorized to be collected by
tho Wallace House in the time of the
States greatest distress. Thev5s receip.a
were in fact for much greater proper
ton of the tax than the ten ( or cent.
called for.
Had there been eny lack of patriotism
in the motives and actions of these much
abused bondholders, surely they would
not have subjected themselves to the risk
OF the great pecuniary loss which would
have befallen them had Chamberlain re-
tanned possession of the State House.
And now when they. come into Court
OF competent jurisdiction, In the manner
prescribed by law, asking only that their
legal. rights be investigated and de-
termined, surely 1t Is no more than their
due that the. State ehonld not hamper
and retard them in the prosecution of
their cause.