Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1881-12-15
COLONEL GANTT'S REMARKS
On Motion 10 Advance the 1908
Bill.

MIs Odubt, VI hlCupuAo lVAlOWOus
commended that the court had not,
in the construction of the Act of 1871,
shown that lat~itudinarian doctrine
that the gentleman on the other side
suggested, but that they had, on the
contrary, been inclined to give it .
strict construction. The courts had
intended for all suitors to reach the
property they sued for in the order in
their cases stand on the docket,
and it was only when the King or
sovereign comes into court with some
case that the public welfare demands
be advanced in that interest,
and then only private litigation gives
to the public interest. aud the
sovereign has his business transacted
The act Of 1868 obviously meant
and refers to cases in a trial
court. II it we're otherwise, the act
of 1871, passed subsequently, covers
the whole subject and has been the
rule and guide of this court ever since
the passage of that act. The action
has always been to facilitate getting
money into the treasury, but the court
has always declined when the purpose
was to get money out ofthe treasury
aud the public credit has been
told that was not the object
of the statute and they we're not
within its provisions. AT the last
term Of the Court, in Jackson, q case
came up frem Memphis involving the
question in which II. M. James sued
the County Trustee of Shelby County
He claimed that as a citizen he had a
right to have a tax levied in order that
the coupons on the debt, which be
owned, should be paid. Mr.. James
moved to have the case advanced on
the ground that it embarrassed the
officer, G. B. Fleece, and interfered
with the interests of the community
not taking these coupons in pay
ment of taxes. The answer to this
was, you are seeking to get money
out Of the treasury, and there is no
embarrassment here" 1t is the policy
Of the Court never to advance the
creditors case to get money out of
the treasury over the interests of in
dividuals. He made these general
observations to state what he consid
cred the law to be, and there bad
been no exception 10 the action of
Court. The gentlemen on the
other side had said this was an easy
case. Then why was the case not set
down on the easy docket? That would
have relieved them Of all trouble;
but of course he could not have been
serious in assuming that it was an
easy case. He had spoken
Of its being a State case,
and that it was embarrassed
BE- it. If somebody had punched the
gentleman, the State would not have
groaned, but numbers Of the bond
holders or railroads would have sighed,
if a railroad could sigh. Laughter.
The interests Of the b~ondhOlders we're
not materially affected, for whenever
the case was decided, the bonds would
date from June, 1881; but what they
wanted was to get the interest in their
pockets. The officers had an interest
10 the $4,000, and that vas their
reason for having it advanced. The
State bad not been embarrassed in the
collection Of her revenue. She may
have too much on hand, but her Leg
islature could find use for it, and it
would be properly applied. Tho 20
cent tax was valid whatever became Of
this law, and no decision in this case
could affect the county tax. III this
act we're decided valid the Legislature
would have 10 levy more taxes. The
complainants we're not ready 10 have
their case tried. This case was pre-
cisely similar with the Dartmouth Col
lege case. In that case Chief Justice
Chase had said that it was a case in
which opinion might widely differ.
but there is a Jurisdiction which
is surely competent 10 try this case,
a place where the wrong there was in
this act, which is admitted for argu-
ment by the other side, can be cor
rected. Was the gentleman's argu-
ment that he wanted a Gnality made
Of this question? Let it 20 to the
ballot box and it would make a fnality
Of it. There the wrong would be cor.
rected. The object Of a Chancery
Court in granting an injunction was to
keep a party from carrying out a mat
ter it cannot try, until II can be
brought in another court where the
relief can be granted. Decide that it
shall be made a inality here, and a
fatal mistake is committed. II would
give trouble, not peace. He contro-
yerted the idea that the officers Of the
State brought this action in their
official capacity, and showed that in
no way was their action as officers
affected by this act, for il all the
duties imposed on them by this act
we're left undcue they would still have
all the duties Of their respective
Offices. The peace and happiness Of
the State was deeply involved in the
question Of whether her representa-
tiYes can be corrupted by the use Of
money. 1t was higher han all other
questions, and involved the preserva-
ton Of a free government, and there
fore the court should not be in a hurry
10 advance tho case. Let the court
decide that the practices alleged, if
they be true, cannot be inquired
and a wrong on the State for
ninety-nine years is fastened upon the
No legal right could spring
such a source. A corrupt Leg
islature we're the sappers and miners
Of the public welfare, and Of free gov
eminent itself. Corruption was always
the forerunner Of despotism. If all
be true thatis charged, something
should be done to correct the evil.
The Funding Board couldgo anywhere
to fund those bonds-to London, TO
Liverpool, or to New York. The Office
which they were elected TO fiji had