The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1879-01-09

certificates OF stock or any OF lner. p.
What is the meaning in the large,
sense which, according to the common
use of language, is to be given to ths
sections of the said resolution ? They
ought not to be extended beyond their
ordinary sense in order to comprehend q
case within their object; for that would
be to give effect to an intention not ex'
pressed. Broom's Legal Maxims, 27G.
When the jurisdiction is sharply de-
fined, and in so many words, what place
Gun there be for the exercise of construc'
tive powers? In regard to the grant Of
power here expressed, the rule that the
express mention of one thing implies the
exclusion of another, may ftly apply
Broom, L. NJ, 27S.
In connection with the consolidated
bonds the only matters mentioned are the
vouchers.
The question is not whether the con-
solidated bonds, coupons and certificates
of stock are valid, but whether they are
valid as issued in accordance with law,
and authorized to be consolidated by the
act of the General Assembly, or as stated
in the 9th section of the resolution, "to
test the validity of the said consolidated
bonds, coupons and certificates of stock,
bringing before the Court the various
classes Of vouchers which it is alleged
impair the validity of the bonds, coupon,
and certificates of stock.
For the Court of Claims to hold that
the act of A. D. 1878 is conclusive by
compromise or otherwise of the validity
of the bonds, coupons and certificates OF
stock, because the securities to be con-
solidated are enumerated in the first Sec
tion of the act, is an end of the case.
Such question could be made before
court of general jurisdiction. This
question is not submitted by the resolu-
ton to the Court of Claims, nor does it
touch the point presented by the first
and ninth sections. The plain intention
of the resolution is to ascertain if the
various public securities set forth in the
first section of the Act of A. D. 1873,
called vouchers in the report of the Bond
Commission, were issued in accordance
with law, and authorized to be coDsolida-
ted by the act. If SO, then the consoli-
dated bonds and certificates of stock,
taken in exchange for the vouchers and
resting on them, were TO be held and ad-
judged valid debts. If these vouchers
we're adjudged not issued in accordance
with law, thch the bonds and certificates
of stock resting on them were to be so
held in view Of the resolution, and were
not authorized to be consolidated-de-
spite their consolidation by the Act of
A. D. 1873.
By the resolution of Sth June, 1877,
the Bond Commission is directed to make
complete investigation. First, of the
entire amount of consolidated bonds
issued under the Act of A. D. 1878, with
particulars thereof Second, Whether
there is in the State treasurer's Office, on
file as vouchers, cancelled bonds, cou-
pons and certificates of stocks of the
issues described, issued in accordance
with law, and authorized to be consoli-
dated by the act above recited to the
amount required by the said act" A. D.
1877, p. 9l9.
Two inquiries are by the second para
graph of Section imposed upon the
Commission. The first, as to the vouch-
ers if they are of file in the treasurer's
office. Second, as to the amount required
by said act, that is the amount specified
therein upon recital.
Keeping in mind these instructions
given to the Commission, with those
given to the Court of Claims. by the
resolution of the 22d of March, 1878, in
Sections l aud 9, can there be doubt OF
the duty CT service to be rendered by
this Court? namely, an examination OF
the vouchers exchanged for consolidated
bonds.
1t is evident the Legislature of A. D.
1876 and 1877 did not conceive itself
bound by the former action of the same
body, and felt itself at liberty to 60 be-
hind the legislation of its predecessor.
The propriety of this is not before the
Court.
That the above construction is 10 be
placed upon the resolution is otherwise
clear. Why should the Legislature refer
to special tribunal the question to test
the validity of the bonds and certificates
of stock, if the validity of these securi-
ties were regarded as established by the
Act of A. D. 1878? Why designate to
the Court, if the bonds and certificates
of stock were valid debts under said act,
the futile inquiry, if they were valid
debts as resting OIL vouchers or securities
which were.invalid as not being issued
according to law? The report of the
Bond Commission assails the validity of
the consolidated bonds and certificates of
stock upon the ground that they rest
upon insufficient or invalid securities,
securities which were not debts, and this
position is not changed or enlarged by
the resolution which creates the Court Of
Claims and refers to the report.
This view of the jurisdiction and pow
er of the Court of Claims disposes Of the
several propositions of the plaintiffs.
The second affirms, "The consolidation
act creates contract between the State
and every holder of her debt accepting
the terms thereof whereby, in considera-
tion of mutual advantages, compost
ton of their claims was made, which Is
final and conclusive"
No opinion is expressed, nor intended
to be, of the force and effect of this
proposition. 1t is enough to say the
question presented is outside of the reso-
luton, and not fonnd in its words or in
tent without departing from the ordinary
meaning of language.
1t is manifest that the third PROPOSE
ton of the plaintiffs, Because the State
by her action otherwise has precluded
herself from denying the obligation OF
any of the debt recognized as valid in
the consolidation act" comes within the
reasons above stated, and cannot be con-
sidered by the court.
The first proposition of the plaintiffs
that "the consolidated bonds are coupon
bonds payable to bearer, that is to say
negotiable instruments in the hands OF
bona fide holders for value before matu-
rity," is not within the scope of the res
olution. but may be modified to express
the real question.
The proposition stated affirmatively is,
that tho vf,uchers that * "the cancelled