Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1880-10-02
THE COUNTY CANVASS.

record Of its opening. The nomi-
nees of the democratic and the boil
ters' convention are both OF them
junior members of the GAINESVILLE
bar; Mr.. Rufus NJ. Rhodes the
former, and Mr.. Louis Munford the
latter. The two young gentlemen
had tried their faculties in prelim-
mary debate in district No. 10 ON
Saturday last, and on Monday eve
ming they showed their mettle be-
fore the good people of GAINESVILLE,
vast crowd of whom thronged
Elders Hall. Mr.. Munford was
accompanied on the platform by
Col. Rogers and Mr.. Rhodes by the
Hon. c. g. Smith.
Precisely at eight Mr.. Rhodes
opened the debate in a speech Of an
hour an quarter in length. The
address consisted OF a history of the
establishment of the debts and an
argument for its obligation on our
people, winding up with an appeal
to the honorand conscience of voters
in behalf of the injured creditors of
the state. We ask our readers to
believe that we are paying no un-
meaning compliment when we ex-
press our wonder and admiration at
the completeness with which he
effected his purpose. We knew
Mr.. Rhodes to be young man of
brilliant talent and to be thorough
~ pasted in the history and legal
bearings of his subject. but even
with this knowledge, we were not
prepared for the lucid clearness
with which he expounded the mat
ter to his audience. A young man
is generally too full of his subject
to arrange his thoughts in a well
digested argument, but our young
speaker combined the perspicuity
and terseness of a practical lecturer
with the animation and fervor of a
| youthful enthusiast.
He announced himself as stand
ing square on the platforms of Gin
cinnati and Nashville, and identi-
fed with the other nominees of the
democratic party; he said he did
not desire to separate his claims on
the public from those of Hancock,
Wright, Daniel, and Bagwell !;
he did not aspire to the sublime
solitude antagonist, who claimed to
stand on no platform but one of his
own making, though he had gra-
ciously permitted the boilers con-
vention in GAINESVILLE to endorse
him. Mr.. r. claimed no such i'm
munity; he thought there were
democrats in Tennessee who knew
something as well as himself, and
was contented as Il democrat to
identify his cause with that of the
honest democracy of Tennessee.
His antagonist had claimed that
this contest was one between the
railroads and the people. He con-
tended that the railroads had moth
ing to do with it, and that 1t was
between those who advised the
people to recognize and pay their
honest debts and those who APP
pealed to their cupidity and other
more baser instincts. He said, how
ever, that he would make issue with
his antagonists position that the
railroads owed the money and the
people did not: he would rely upon
the plain recorded history of the
transactions on which the debt de-
pended, to prove that there was no
shadow of a pretext for throwing
the Indebtedness on any existing
railroad company.
The history of these transactions
has now been so often stated, both
in these columns and in public
meetings, that we will not give
even an abstract of Mr.. Rhodes
treatment of it; suffice it to say that
in our honest opinion the truth of
the debt question has never been
more completely, clearly or tersely
stated in this city, though we have
heard it done by some of the first
minds in the state; and though we
have ourselves for a long period
given special attention to it, we
make no exception in favor of these
columns.
Having completed this statement
he undertook to show that though
through the disasters of the war the
state had had to shoulder the pay
ments which would in the natural
course of events have fallen on the
roads now bankrupt, even so the
state has not lost by the transac-
ton, for that the assessed value of
real property increased between
1852 and 1860 by the amount of from
300 to 400 millions, and all through
placing her products within reach
of remunerative markets.
Mr.. Rhodes then Intercepted
his antagonist whether, if the valid
ity of the bonds were submitted to
the judgment of a court and they
were pronounced valid, he would
consent to their payment.
He went further; he produced a
bond issued to the L. G. d M. r. r.
when Mr.. w. MunfOrd, father of
his antagonist, was its president,
and decorated with a portrait of
that gentleman, and asked whether
he would contend that that bond |
was fraudulently issued, and wheth-
er he would say that a contract |
thus endorsed by his own father
ought to be repudiated.
Finally, he showed that repudi-
ating these bonds can never cancel
them that their unsettled demands
will always continue to hang as an
incubus over the business and cred
it and fair name of the state, Grip