Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-07-31
ARE TENNESSEE BONDS JUSTLY
DUE?
(sECOND PAPER.)

When q man OF nlm mas paper
out i'm the market, and any of 1t
which is overdue is presented for
payment, 1t is open for him to prove
if he can that that paper is Illegally
or fraudulently issued and he is not
lawfully bound to take it up. But
where such a plea IS that Is made,
it is the bOnd-maker and not the
bond-holder who is bound to fur
nish proof in the matter. The pos
session of the bond with the sigma
ture of him who issued it or of his
authorized attorney, is all the evil
dence that the holder needs. 1t
would be considered preposterous
when a mans bond is presented for
payment for him to say, 81 think
that there was probably some lille
gality or irregularity in the issue of
that paper, and will not pay it till
you prove that there was nome"
The plain answer to this would be:
"Here is your signature; if there is
anything wrong in it, it is for you
to prove, not me-"
Now, this paper is mainly written
for readers who are business men,
who will recognize at once the
reasonableness of the above posi-
ton. Very we'll; it is now our pur-
pose to call the attention of such
men to the argument of those who
hold that the bonds of this state now
outstanding are fraudulent and lille
gal. These men had the OppOrtu-
nifty offered them two years ago of
thoroughly sitting the history of the
Tennessee bonds, with a view to
testing their legality. A committee
OF the late legislature was appointed
consisting of five low-tax men and
only two state-credit men. In other
words, it was a committee mainly
composed of men who had for years
been asserting the invalidity of the
bonds, and their appointment must
have been looked upon as a chal-
lenge to prove the illegality they
had long been alleging against the
bonds. 1t is not conceivable that If
there was any proof of the sort they
should have failed tie produce it, and
failing to produce it, the bondhOld-
ers and those who desire to deal
honestly by them have a right to
claim that no such proof exists.
We proceed with our examination
of their report.
The first bonds which were Issued
by the state i'm aid of railroad con-
structiOn were the bonds issued for
stock in the Hiawassee railroad
company under an act of legislature
dated 1893. OF such bonds 449 were
issued of 81 900 each, at per cent.
interest. Similar bonds were Issued
as follows: POI to the East Tennes-
see " Georgia railroad, 40 at 81 per
cent. and 80 at per cent. to the La
Grange & Memphis road. These In
the aggregate amount to $3.50, 900, of
which 1872 bonds are still outstand-
ing, amounting with interest to over
half "A million dollars. These bonds
have been stated separately from all
that have since been issued, and
must be discussed separately, be-
cause they were issued on n differ
ent principle.
In these cases the state became a
stakeholder in the several roads
and issued her bonds in payment of
the stock made over to her. In
those subsequently issued she did
not take stock, but simply loaned !
her credit in the form of bonds to
be repaid by the railroads within a
given time. These, therefore, be- |
long to what was then called "the |
debt proper" being from the first |
an absolute and not a contingent |
debt. This fact, however, does not |
hinder the committee from ques-
tiOning the liability. Let us exam
inc their grounds for doing so. We |
give them in the words of the report:
The state, under the act of 1856, issued ITO
bonds amounting TO Sll6,2j0 for this amount
of stock in the Lagrange 4 Memphis rail-
road. Afterwards, and under the act OF 1888
ninety more bonds amounting to sol go
were issued for state stock in said road
These two sums aggregated make S207, 500
stock In IL belonging to the state. What has
become OF this stock Is not definitely known |
The Memphis & Charleston railroad was in |
by an act passed February .,
1876 and. as your committee learn. this road |
absogbed the Lagrange 4 Memphis. The
list section of the act Incorporating the
ons refers % the transfer OF the state stock
m the Lagrange & Memphis TO the Memphis
! Charleston. lt Is claimed that the Menu
Dhis a Charlesao ls ssss accounted and settled
been able to find no record evidences in
ne archives OF the state rs TO when, how
nd upon what basis Z Old 50. And we
q directed 20 institute search for this inter-
ii. and IL found unoceounled fors make u
ealize for the state nAl thai properly and
M. staie also, under the act Of lSsSs took
m ESQ stock la the MiaWnSsa haAi19Nd and
sued Is bonds therefor. &c 49, s as IVY
Tiasgnssa road nfkeE rneaANAnR 49, $500
o,,sIz frrar,i fhe state, became EhR properly
! ,s ~, vefled into the East 4enneNseq n
$1,000 ffa letter ros& receiving TIE
,,amInins stock bonds auihnEiHnl W. na
49, - fhe fTfAw'isse, land tEfeeaE4 roe tal9
atn to I1ave SAii se4a ln # instead n -.r
is,.sr 1nndrad and twenty-five ta9use ss.
5ti6fs s. the principal q this stosk a. s. ts1
asss 1.aas s1N.Hs disposed nG mH MtA bh nen1~ .
12s@ sfI..I WftetItnF tfin reH1atnAm a #2s-
& hss heen legally Necounfe4 lo9 = ~
4N.s.aH Hln VnHsr atNaainAthaa AA AAAAA r9Ah@S-