The New Orleans daily Democrat. [volume] (New Orleans, La.) 1877-1880, 1879-06-18

s.
u An WEI1NyT2T1 NJ NJ TTY N5n
- = 49, y An19-ls,1A Y ~ iSs w
through fraud. error mr. other HE ea,,sa vo
are bound ii era .iieafa n -n,,f s nj th'.tg 4
i aside. have certain references here H. rnolev
who seems to be q fayorita author With tR
i gentlemen on the other side Tha hnnk i
not before me. or / could read vo1 from
that book in Language much more elnn,1er
i than mine, the views that taka with r.sfaT
ence to the power 81 6 convention. which view
are sustained by him throuphnl1t He saws
II | remember the Language rightly tha
can do, 1t is not SO difficult to say that which
| 1t cannot do. And that which Ii cannot Il,
You will find In the restrictions given In In
constitution Of the United States. the onI,
not establish any other government than on,
republican In form; you cannot pass AT, ae
retroactive IN effect; you cannot pass an ac
| lmpairlng the obligations of d contract; ane
there are one or two other restrictions. 7 an
| told by the gentlemen on the other side tina
this Is lmpa1ring the obligations of a contract
But that takes Tor granted that we 'acknowI
i edge that there was contract entered into
according TO law; not only according to stat
utory law, but in accordance with the pro
at the time that 1t was entered into. Now
| gentlemen OF the convention, taking them
! upon their own premises let us
| see whether some OF these contracts, upon
| which the bondhOlder is seeking to recover
his money from the State, come within the
category OF a contract. The Convention will
pardon me from running over this matter,
because 1t has been travelled over SO frequent
" that really fear that am trespassing
uselessly upon your time. In regard to The
flrst class OF bonds that came VI. for discus
sion this morning, the gentleman from Pointe
Coupee stated that, after mature reflection
and examination of the authorities upon the
point, ne found that the Supreme Court of
the state OF Louisiana had decided adversely
to the pretensions OF the supporters OF the
point taken by them In their report-ln one
or TWO instances drqatendO, and In another q
pare statement OF 1acts-he found that the
supreme I, re-, Court had met these issues and had
aeeiaea 1 Adversely s to the pretenslons OF the
NOW, NE. President, ! have not had time to
examine the reports since, but II my memory
serves me right, and have consulted with a
prominent member OF the committee who has
mace L point TO examine closely before this
point, and ne tells me that in every single in
STANCE referred to by these gentlemen, the
point upon Wnlch we base our report was
never raised, and, therefore, never passed
upon Ihe subject to which ! allude Is that
these laws creating the debts evidenced by
some OF these bonds were unconstitutional
because IN the act creating the debt there was
no adequate means and ways provided for the
esxtlnguishment OF that debt. ] don't believe
on o or ne 70 70 rser t. the fons
Has been read to Won often ana van are familiar
with 1t. It strikes me that the very moment
you show that a debt which is attsmnted to
be collected from the State Of T,nnisiana d
and before the Convention "a q valid and law
full debt. the moment Won show that II was
created by an act Of The I,epislatnra with1a1t
this fundamental requirement.. that moment
it falls to the pro1nd: and wI,yS Reaansa Il
was not created under the consfitntion' i i
listened with Measure to the ~alon1ent RI
marks Of the gentleman from the narish II
Pointe Co,luee. when he undertook the dafanea
of the State OF Mississippi. That State has
e up Is ae whose tsn were Re
mentioned the facts eonnected WITH tha 20.
called ran11diatinn. yshan ha ansLn l., - fhasa
elouuent terms in defense Of The honor 9 II
Mississippi The facts were brnnr HTS bach II
upon which she resisfad tha .mV ~
those claims was ,nreeisalv tha arn,,nd
mon which wa fn,indad On, cno ~ i.,tt.,
report, Il was that the debt If the gtatss
of Mississlpni was moi. q eonstit,afinns1 dahf
and therefera tho nannio If Wiss;se;r,l I baa
j Decentralization Inpra ana rafs.i,,p l.h t
I'D ID reeognize IL and ii refse T. nas Il
Gentlemen Of the Ganventian tbis rsn M i,
not based rpon anv fnundatfnn DIV given 10 ra %
pudiators: it ID based 1Innn the same ppo,nd
upon which Mississinn raf,,sed to k,'s an 'p
IIt debt unjust baca,1sa ,1la - ana al ~
fbarata examInaton ul ~ ~
that the bonds Of the Opelousas and Great
Western Railroad, that the bonds issued in
ia vor of the jackson and Great Northern
Railroad 5HI that the bonds issued in favor Of
The Crosse Tete and Opelousas Railroad, and
several other series OF bonds mentioned were
granted by a Legislature who in creating that
debt disregarded the constitutional injunc-
lion, and did not provide adequate ways and
means for the extinguishment Of that debt. [
lay It down, Gentlemen Of the Convention,
Is q proposition not yet controyerted, that
unles the act creating the debt does contain
that provision, it is, under this article of the
constitution, no debt whatever. It is as
though it never had any existence, and the
people Of the State of Louisiana incurred no
legal, moral or any other obligation to meet
It or pay it. Now, let us see what the fact is
looking at the act subscribing 81, 6DOO to the
Opelousas Railroad. What do you fnd2 The
State of Louisiana, under the constitution Of
1862, was authorized to issue bonds and sub
scribe stock to that amount. She is then au-