The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-06-13

It has been said that the State has received
value Tor the bonds and the warrants, and the
so-called evidences Of debt that are outstand-
ing In her name, and which we find have been
What value, sir, has the State received /
don't mean the agents of the State: If an I'M
faithful agent has exceeded bis power OF attor-
ney, has wrongfully borrowed money in your
ing with your Instructions. and he has spent
1t IA riotous living, spent. u Wastefully and
recklessly, and not for the purpose Of his
agency, you have not received it. And
now ask the gentlemen OF this
Nothing! Nothing! Because those who were
recklessly administering the government dur
ing these long years, have received some
money and squandered II. does that innre
to the State? Sir, it is needless for me to dis
cuss the Issues discussed by the gentleman
that last preceded me, and the report upon
the books OF the Auditor. Are you to take
this report for true, the record In the Audi
tors Office as to what the State has paid and
the unsupported averment OF a gentleman
who was one of the agents instrumental In
squandering this money? Hestated that dur
Ing this period the people Of the State Of Lou
isiana had paid less than the levees had cost
Pc the saoM nhey sno
by the people of the State. He stated, sir,
that during the last ten years the people OF
the State OF Louisiana had paid less than
So, 100000. The books show that In 1869 ST.
State, and what did we get for that?
Nothing. The next year we paid $6,537, 900;
and what did we get for that2 Nothing. The
next year $6,G16,O 900 was paid; the next year
S4,3l2,OOO; the next year 81, 0l6,0 900 was paid
by the people of the State, and the next year
$3,514, 600 was paid-more, sir, than enough
money to have sustained the government;
more than enough to build railroads like net
work throughout the State Of Louisiana;
more than enough to build more public Inn
desired or the Imagination pictured. And yet
we are told that the legacy left the State
is valid; that the State got value received In
the legacy left III the shape of bonds. Sir, it
is impossible; it is not true. Now, Mr.. Presi-
dent, let us look very briefly al a few Of the
issues made during this period. The gentle
man said that every bond Issued by him was
In accordance with law. suppose he meant
statute; the statute authority. But, sir, the
statute authority is not law. Law is con-
thority not In violation of constitutional
provisions; that is fundamental. We will
have occasion soon to see whether or not
some OF these acts were not even In violation
of statutory law. The first issueto which we
call attention, sir, is one OF which about one
half were signed by him (Warmoth), and the
other half by his SUCCESSOR 81 600 to the
Louisiana and Texas Railroad Company.
What, sir, briefly was the real history Of that
case2 Sir, at the time the first act was
passed authorizing the issue Of bonds in aid
mortgage bonds and the company was
to pay them primarily, and the State
was to pay only In the event the company
failed. At the time that act was passed there
was a bill in equity In the UHited States
Court In which the title Of that company was
attacked for fraud; and that was known to
every man in the State who had any interest
in the public welfare. And this fraud was
committed con BY whom BY John T. Ludellng,
mitted the fraud; who was their agent.
Whether they knew it or not, care not;
care not to what party they belong to.
am not here defending members Of
the Democratic party: am trying to speak
of what believe to be the true interests Of
the people OF Louisiana, and 1t is perfectly
immaterial to me what party Mr. Ludelings
coadjutors belonged to. The decision OF the
Supreme Court OF the United States states
that Mr.. Ludeling bribed the agent OF the
Georgia bondhOlders to withdraw his bid and
proposition; that bid Of 100000 had just
been made for the road, which the gen.
tleman said was not worth $4,000,
and Mr.. Ludeling induced the sheriff Of the
parish, by personal influence or corrupt
from himself OF $4,000 instead of 100000, for
a road which the gentleman says was worth
only $4,000; and, sir, 1t was to that eombina-
ton, through the political Influence at the
time ut the head OF affairs in this State that
this 81 $4,000 was issued. Between five and
six hundred Thousand dollars OF that was Is
sued by the gentleman who has just taken his
seat; but the company began to be In default
on the Interest on these bonds, and the Attor-
ney General in that day Instituted suit
against the company for the interest in de-
fault, for some $4,000. Previous to this suit
they had had political influence enough to
substitute this subscription stock for these
bonds. This act had been passed in February
or March, 1872, and it was publicly stated that
published in all the papers that he would re-
fuse to sign it, because 1t was we'll known
that the company was myth that 1t had
no real capital; that its title was very
precarious, II not sadly fraudulent, and that
issued. and that the State would not go
through the farce Of subscribing S1,122,O0o Of
stock upon any such terms. But, sir, In the
month Of August, 1872, Mr.. Ludeling paid q
visit to New Orleans, and suddenly, early In
promulgated. But, mark you; mark you,
this suit had been instituted In the
meantime, and 1t must appear to have be-
come law before that time, and it was pro-
mulgated as having been signed on the tenth
OF April. do not pretend to know or to say
when that signature was affixed, but these
were the facts as they appeared at that time.
Ihe provisions OF the constitutional limta-
tions upon the powers OF the servants of the
people were fagrantly violated in this act,
In the manner indicated by other gentlemen.
The road was built with other capital, and we
are told, forsooth, the honor and faith OF the
State was pledged by such proceedings.
make no remark about the Bayou Bguf
and Crocodile bonds. because they have been
decided by the Supreme Court to be illegal;
they have no consideration, certainly, and It
is perfectly immaterial to this discussion.
All OF these last bonds OF which have spoken
were funded in consols; they fastened to get
cover that act would give them.
1 come now, secondly, to the Mississippi and
Mexican Gulf Ship Canal bonds. Whatever
any gentleman may have thought Of the
feasibility and ultimate success Of this scheme
has nothing to do with the subject under dis
cussion. What are the facts? There was q
natural bayou running in the parish Of st.
Bernard, just below the city. am sorry do
not see the member from st. Bernard in his
seat, that he might correct me if I make any
in the facts. There was a natural
bayou down there A schemer by the name
of Noyes thought there were millions in it ifhe
could only get the State treasury to back him.
He got an art nalsnd arnrnpri in Senn nnn In