The evening light. [volume] (San Antonio, Tex.) 1881-1883, 1882-03-16
The Bond Compromise Question From n
German Standpoint.

German Standpoint.
Translated From the Beobachter.
The mayor has invited the citizens to vote
on the list Of April for or against the compro-
mise in regard to the payment of the bonds,
that is whether they will make April fools oil
themselves or not. 1t is generally known that
the city of San Antonio issued bonds to a
company to build a railroad, but as no road
was built, the city refused, in Justice, to pay
id bonds. In consequence of which refusal
the 'bondholders instituted suit against the
city, which was dec ded in the supreme court
of this state in favor of defendant, (City), and
declaring the act under which they were is
sued as unconstitutional and nulty, owing
TO which the bonds were of no value. The
bondholders then brought their case before
the United States circuit court, (liere it must
be remarked that the United States circuit
court is divided into two separate divisions in
the trial of cases the so-called law docket and
equity doCket), which decided that the bonds
were of legal form and issued mandamus for
the payment of same. Thus the matter stood,
when in July last ex Gov. Davis, attorney for
the city, declared that the city, according to
every principle of right and justice, should re-
sist the payment of the bonds and carry the
suit to the court of equity of the United States
supreme court and advised further, in order
to avoid costly litigation in consequence of the
mandamus for some of the Aldermen and one
of the county commissioners to resign, and
the case is now pending in the United States
supreme court.
The bondholders, getting uneasy, set all
forces to work to save something from i'm
pending ruin, they even got so magnanimous
hat al l,l{
no one will possibly be simpleton enough to
believe they are doing this out of right and
justice). The English and German press were
put in motion to work for the compromise.
The Express is pumping prominent citizens
and surprising as it is that they are all in favor
OF compromise. but it suggests the idea that
they, or many of their friends, are holders of
the bonds.
The Freie Presse is even worse, and says in
its edition Of the 81 OF March last: "1'he su-
preme court of the U. S. has decided in favor
OF paying the bonds, and against this decision
there is no appeal" yet the PreSse knows that
an appeal has been instituted. Again, the
Press threatens the alderman with impliSon-
ment, and the city and citizens with anarchy
and loss of hOmeSteads and real estate, etc,
1t is to be supposed that all these machina-
tons of the bond holders would quiet the cit-
zens and little reflection would reason
thus, that it can't be SO very
bad, otherwise the bondholders would
not try to move heaven and earth to
cry and weep for the compromise, but they
have all reason to fear the worst. What may
turn out certainty, that they will fare as bad
in the United States supreme court as they
did in the state supreme court, l. e. be thrown
out of court, with a worthless claim and YER
dict for cost of suit.
1t is argued that the present holders of bonds
bought them in good faith, and in consequence
the city must pay. To this we will say that
if the present holders bought worthless paper
to hold those responsible from whom they
bought and not hold the city, which has no
Obligations whatever in the matter.
The city must carry on their suit in which it
has such just and favorable expecta-
tons to win the same in the end. A
city that can spend tn usands on walerworks,
bridges and general improvements has also
means to protect itself against such shame
full swindle. 1t would indeed be degrading to
allow itself to be hoodwinked in this manner,
and it is high time to make an example to put
a stop to the wholesale robbing system on
the Common property of the city. Therefore,
citizens, vote against the compromise and let
the suit take its course and give the $50, 600
10 the improvent of our streets. Sic fms CO.
ronabit opus. l..