The Pulaski citizen. [volume] (Pulaski, Tenn.) 1866-current, 1879-06-05

The jackson Tribune and Sun of
last week contains a strong letter
from Gov. Marks to Hon. John A.
Gardner in favor of the ratification
by the people of the 5O-4 compro-
mise for the settlement of the State
debt. We print only the conclud-
ing portion:
Recent events have changed the
whole complexion of this question
and made this the last opportunity
the State will ever have for a favor
able adjustment of the debt unless
my judgment is at fault. l will
state my reasons for this conclusion
briefly. The adjustment proposed
would not have been adopted by the
Legislature, but for the offer made
by the railroads simply because
they saw no adjustment would be
made unless they undertook to per-
form their part. Suits were pend
ing against them, and while the
weight of legal opinion was in their
favor yet they preferred a compro-
mise rather than risk the result of
the suits. Suppose no settlement
is made and the suits are decided in
their favor, is it not clear they will
not pay a dollar they can avoid2
On the other hand, if the suits are
successfully prosecuted the great
bulk of the debt will still be left for
the State to settle, while the rail
road companies whose property is
sold by the bondholders will be
clamoring and lobbying for indem-
nifty from the State. After the
suits now pending shall have been
settled adversely to the bondhold-
Ars, all of them will be willing to
accept the adjustment proposed, but
there is something less than three
millions in bonds now outstanding
issued to the solvent roads. The
holders of these particular bonds
are profoundly interested in defeat
ing any settlement until the suits
are decided. If they succeed in
successfully prosecuting their suits
the amount they will receive will
exceed the amount the State pro-
poses to pay. If they fail in their
suits they expect to participate III
the benefit of any future settlement
which may be made. 1t is their
policy, therefore, to hasten their
suits and to postpone settlement.
The proposed adjustment makes
this line of policy imperative on
their part since it provides that a |
day should be fixed limiting the |
privilege of funding under the law,
and they know if the adjustment is
ratified by the people that they will
be put to an election as to whether
they will rely upon the State or the
railroads before their suits can pos |
sibly be decided. Consequently the
bondholders will leave no stone un-
turned to defeat the proposed ad |
justment. Their line of policy is
clearly outlined in their recent pub
lished manifesto. In that they. seek
to encourage all holders of bonds |
issued TO railroads to believe that
all the roads are good foF the bonds |
outstanding when the fact is well |
known that our branch roads can
not be operated as indie pendent |
roads so as to make them pay. As /
a further inducement, they say TIE
suits will be decided this summer
when it is known that this is i'm
possible. They say to the other
bondholders that if this adjustment
is defeated the State will make
better one in the future, when all |
who know the facts know it is not |
true. And finally to defeat the set
tlement before the people they say
the submission is not legal and at
tempt to coerce all holders of rail-