Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1880-09-14
paying full interest on the unpaid
debt to the actual creditor.
FRAUDULENT EVASION.

paying full interest on the unpaid
debt to the actual creditor.
FRAUDULENT EVASION.
Surely such a conception is not par
alleled, in point Of extravaganza,
among the pretenses Of fraudulent
evasion recorded 10 history, eccentric
as from necessity such p%retenses have
often been. Taking notice hat the
hypothetical swindler in this imagin-
airy drama was a sovereign state, does
not essentially relieve the difficulty.
In this instance the astute draughts-
man seems to have perceived that the
object might not be understood, and,
evidently, with a view to obviate any
possible m%isconception, it was directed
that the prescribed credit should be
"as between the state and the COM
pany." The only protested object of.
the twelfth section being to protect
the interest of the state, that section
is not, therefore, to be regarded as
having reserved to the state a general
power of legislating for its own aid
and comfort, to the utter subver-
sion ofjustice by annihilating all other
interests, save and except only the
vested rights Of the stakeholder.
There was no interest to reserve by
that section any power other than to
subserve the objects Of the system
then organized. Scarcely any propo.
sition has been sanctioned 20 frequent
ly and by such emphatic determine
tions Of our highest judicial tribunal
as that the law of the state at the
time a contract is made enters into
the contract and is part of it in such
manner hal the obligation of the con-
tract, as thus constituted, cannot be
impaired byany subsequent legislation.
1t would hardly be decorOus to occupy
attention by citing authorities to this
point g Wallace's U. S. reports. CD.
The bonds in question were issued
and negotiated in such instance under
and in pursuance Of a public statute.
They were duly registered in a public
Office and ear.marked in conformity
with that statute, so as Enthusiastically
to fix their identity. The statute de-
clared explicitly that 'the bonds
should constitute a lien upon all the
property in question to secure the
payment by the company and con
formally to common usage in such
transactions that lien was by the same
statute vested" in the states as a
public political corporation to eifectu-
ate hat object. The statute was a
constitutional part of contract com
pleted as to each bond by its sale to
the money. lender, and was as COM
pletely incorporated with and made a
part of that contract as # its prOvi-
sions, according to their true sienif-
canoe, intent and meaning, with the
most thorough and perfectly intelli-
gible explanations, had been written
out at length on the face of the bond.
With this plain and simple statement
of the contract between the compa-
MES, the state and the bondholders, as
well as the great law Of inviolabili ty
before them, the judicial tribunals
will be called upon to say whether by
its own mere volition, the political
corporation so vested with this lien
can arbitrarily strip the bondholders
of all interest in it. Casting aside
cumbrous details and thus reducing
the question to its essential elements
is to answer it.