The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1879-05-07
THE STATE DEBT.
REPORT OF THE COMMISSIONERS
SENT TO NEW YORK BY
COY MARKS.

and Nat. Baxter Jr, OF Nashville,
who went TO New York as commits.
sioners appointed by Gov. Marks to
confer with the holders of Tennes-
see bonds relative to the compr omise
settlement Of the State debt propos.
ed in the act passed at the recent
session OF the General Assembly,
publish the following full account of
their negotiations with the bondhold-
ers, the difficulties in the way and
how they were overcome:
REPORT TO THE COMMISSIONERS.
To His Excellency, Albert s. Marks,
Governor of Tennessee: Your commits
sioners appointed to bear the PROPOSE
ton for settlement made by the Gen
eral Assembly to the holders of the
bonds of the State, and to confer with
them in regard to the same, would most
respectfully submit the following:
Before consulting any of the bond
holders we visited Washington City and
communicated to our Senators and Rep
resentatives in Congress, and other emf
nent Tennesseans, the nature aud OBJ
iect of our mission.
We addressed to each of them letter,
copy of which, with their responses,
is herewith submitted, asking an ex-
preston of such views in relation to the
settlement offered by the State as each
might see proper to make. AS will be
seen by reference 20 this correspond
ence, they approved the settlement as
the best that would likely be made for
years to come, if ever Afterward we
visited New York for the purpose of
meeting such holders of Tennessee
bonds as we might be able to see, and of
advising the acceptance of the PROPOSE
ton.
1t was evident before we reach New
York that the bondholders' committee
had acted preciritately in deciding what
course they would take In reference to
the proposed compromise. They had
| issued circular letter and sent it to the
country adhering to the sixty cents
proposition.
The publication about the same time
of the opinion of the eminent advocate,
Mr.. Charles O'Conor, claiming a lien
upon the railroads for SIS, 100000 was
made for the manifest purpose of stimu-
lating the hopes of the bondholdcrs for
better settlement and to preclude their
acceptance of this proposition. The
committee issued the circular without
consultation with the bondholders, and
the purpose was to have the action OF
the committee sustained in thus sum
parily disposing of the matter without
a convention of the bondholders. TIC
an inquiring bondholder the reason as
signed for not calling a meeting of the
bondhOlders was that it was doubtful il
such meeting would reject the prop
osition. The committee was unques
tionably destitute of authority to deter
mine this question. The purpose of the
committees creation was to bring abou
d settlement of the debt, and when tina
was offered the authority of the com
mittee was at an end, without furthe
instructions from their constituents
The convention of Feb. 9, 1879, which
submitted the sixty cents proposition t.
the present General Assembly, was pre-
arranged so as to have the action of tn
committee, in presenting the offer o
sixty cents, sustained without discussion
That convention was composed of Ger
tain New York bondholders, and whel
a suggestion was made that each bond
holder present should subscribe hi
name and the amount of the bonds h
represented, the statement was mad
: that "the paucity of the holdings repre-
scented would greatly injure the move
ment," and it was not done. The &C
ton of the bondholders of New York
in making any offer of settlement wa
never more than an index to what
might reasonably be presumed the ma
? iority would do. 1t bound only thos
who actually notified the State author
ties that they would accept the sixt
, cents settlement.
. In view of the fact that the bonds ar
e held all over the United States and Ell
rope we could only hope to obtain frOr
New York holders the same sort c
' sanction that was obtained for sixt
cents offer. The committee owed il
support to the decision of a majorit
of its constituents in New York, an
who created and sustained the con
mittee we considered sufficient to met
the requirements of the act of Assem-
bly,. Before addressing ourselves
f individuals, however, we thought
n proper to see Mr.. Kelley, the Chat
man of the committee.
!. Our first interview with Mr.. Kelle
was entirely satisfactory, he declinin
/ to act for the committee as its chairman
t but agreeing to accept so far as he Wa
individually concerned, and promisin
I to see others with a view of inducin
like action upon their part. In our ne1
s lnteFNe" WHICH OCcuIICu INC loiIo"IH
day, by appointment, he informed 1
/ that he had become satisfied that
could take no action individually incol
sistent with his action as chairman
v the committee, but notwithstanding "
e could expect no assistance from him,
: assured us that he would make no o.
position.
: We then pursued our original purpol
/ of appealing from the decision of I'll
t committee to the Individual bondholC
e ers who control the committee. Prom
4 inent among those whose acceptance "
. first obtained were the chairman of I'll
/. last bondholders' meeting, which mao
f the SIXTY cents nrnnosition to the pre-