St. Landry democrat., 1879-06-14
"A'""Fs's -seport oft ase Commit
tee osl the State ner,t

The undersigned members of the
Committee on the State Debt, having
been unable to assent to the renort Of
the committee, consider it their duty to
submit the reasons for their dissent:
The startling results of the report of
the committee necessarily induce hesi-
tation and reluctance in acceptaing the
principles which have guided the COM
mittee i'll reaching it's conclusions.
The mind is dazed by the annulment
of nearly twelve millions of bonds by a
stroke of the pen ; and Though i'll times
of revolution, when the Imagination is
superheated by political excitement,
such an extraordinary act may be ac-
cepted as the necessity OF the occasion,
one cannot witness it in the midst OF
profound peace without grave apprehen-
sions of its justice and propriety.
Doubtless some who approve the
measure are amazed at the moderation
of the committee, but the undersigned
do not believe majority OF this Con-
yention are in accord with the views
expressed by the committee, or after
due consideration will sustain its re-
port. N
the bonds issued by the State, outstand-
ing on the first Of January, 1874, and
which, according to the committees re-
port, amounted to 1887, 800, only Il frac-
tion thereof-to-w $3,486, ,000-is legal;
and they reject $19,G93,447 80 as OF no
force, legal or moral.
Of the amount of the debt found by
the committee to be legal, to wit: 3d.
4SG,00O, the State is entitled to S1,329,5
to be carried to the credit of the free
school fund and the seminary fund,
leaving outstanding in the hands OF
parties So, 15G, 800. TO whom this s., 15G,-
500 is to be paid cannot be ascertalned,
as the bonds considered valid by the
committee have been exchanged at 60
cents on the dollar for consols, issued
under the act of 1874, and the particular
cOuSOlS, thus issued in exchange tor
these bonds cannot be identified.
The result is that the State owes itself
81 ,339 800 as trustee for the purposes OF
education, and it also owes to a nameles
crditor So, 3,156,500.
How this unknown creditor is to be
ferreted out puts the imagination at
fault, and hence all that the Legislature
can do is to advertise for him as is done
in the case of unknown heirs of vacant
SUGGESTIONS, and retain the amount OF
the debt in the treasury until he ap-
Dears, for it is impossible to make the
exchanges proposed in the ordinance re-
ported by the committee, since the bonds
recognized by the ordinance as Kalid
and exchangeab'e have been surrender
ed and Cancelled by the owners who
have accepted consols in lieu thereof.
What strikes the mind in contem
plating the plan of the committee is that
the State is held bound to pay bonds
when purchased by itself as an invest
ment of the school funds, while the
State is considered discharged from re-
sponsibility for the same kind OF bonds
Ir, i,Ii yois
For instance, the free school was par
tialiy invested in railroad bonds issued
bv the State prior to the wars the
amount of railroad bonds thus purchased
was $4O1 900, including $4,000 OF the
bonds issued to the Nashville Railroad
ComDany. IF third persons who invest
cd in the same kind Of bonds are to@oe
deprived of their rights for the reasons
set forth by the committee, 1T seems to
be lust that the State and its school fund
should be subjected to the same heroic
treatment.
The committee in its report complete
lv disreyards all moral aud legal obliga-
ton on the part of the State to refund
the consideration received by it for any
of the bonds declared to be illegal.
The difference between a fraudulent
bond and a bond void for want OF power
to issue it is well known, and Important
consequences flow from it..
IF A debt be contracted in fraud, and
the debtor receive no consideration for
it, then there is no legal or moral ohiiga-
tion on the part of the debtor to respect
his contract.
But if State or corporation issues a
bond in manner not authorized by the
constitution OF the State or the law
creating the corporation, though the
hond may be void the obligation to re-
store the consideration received for 1t
sursists, in law and equity,
In the case of McCrackcn VS.. San
Francisco. Is California, Rps8 p. 699,
Chief Justice Field as the organ OF the
court held, that although the ordinance
nassed by the Common Council, author
izipg the sale of the real estate belong
ing to the city of Francisco was VOID,
vet the obligation to restore Wha6 Is IN W
Justly received was IndependenI OF Tue
restraining clauses Of the city charter,
The ohligation to restore the price OF
the sale made, and which had been re-
ceiyed by the city, it was held, arose
from the obligation to do justice, to re-
store what belongs to others, which rests
1,non all persons natural or ARTIFICIAL, and
IN the language of the court it may
Wali he doubted whether it would be
con,netent for the Legislature to exempt
the city. any more than private indlVl-
duais. from liability under circumstances
of this character" =,
The same doctrine sg announced ny
the Court Of Appeals OF New YORK, IN
the case of the Oneida Bank Us; oisSaflo
Rank. 81 New York, 400. In that case
. bank issued on illegal certificate pro-
hibited by the banking laws OF New
Ynrk. vet the holder of the certificate
was allowed to recover back the con-
s;Serat;on paid to the baak, and the in-
dnrsee of the void certificate was held
nntitied to recover the consideration re-
caived Inv the bank from the payee OF
the certificate the ind0rsee OF the void
Certificate was regarded :. a!s equitable
assignee Of the consideration gtEen for
In the light Of these suggestions, it Is
not enough to show that the bonds is
sued by the State are void, for non-co
Diiapee with constitutional provisions:
IT is necessary to go q step further, and
establish that the State received no
consideration for the bonds issued by
Eraro sentiment of honor and justice
aen,ands III ut lie who receives what does
not hainno 70 him should restore it. LII
the bends are yoi,., the State has receiv--
al Something for potliing. Law and
insticn concur in the enforcement OF the
Intv an the part Of the State TO surren-
der that something to its true owner.
The State has received in cash $46i, ;,
s60 40 for Sf,000,000 of bonds issued
nnder act No. 30, of 1865, which bonds
have been reduced by funding. to $500,
00o. Ithas also received in cash 81 ,9sl,--
s0ll Gg for $4,000,000 of bonds. issued
under act No. 1l5, or OF ieol reauced oy