The farmers' union. (Memphis, Mo.) 1891-1895, 1891-03-12
Brief History Of the Railroad and
Bond Suit, in July, 1870.

4 pcrtition was circulated by some
of the citizens of the county, request,
ing the county court to- subscribe
stock to the u. l. & n. II. 4. to issue
bends for TIE stock, Il was one of
those citizens.) there was Il remon-
STRANGE circulated at the same time
against the proposition to subscribe
the stock and take bonds. The pres
ilent of the road come to this county
AMI made speeches in favor of the
subscriptions, claiming that the taxes
the railroad paid would he equal to
one half CT the interest on the bonds.
and in time would liquidate the en-
tire debt. The demonstrates denied
that proposition, and claimed that
the road was exempt from taxation
for 20 years after the completion Of
the sasHe.
President Drake denied that, and
said that if the county court would
subscribe the stock and give the
company the county bonds i'll pay
mcnt thereof, the company would
also rclinquish that right and pay all
taxes that might he assessed against
the roat; Drake, the president of
the load gave Marion Cowcll anal my
self written statement to that effect
to induce us to circulate the pcrtition.
We, circulated partitions conii,'ing o.,
the written promises Drake gave, us.
Cowell and myself testified to that
fact before the United States chaunc-
nv court, in Kcokuk, Iowa. Drake
could have heard the testimony if lie
bad remained in the court, as Hughes,
the railroad attorney wanted him to
do. They have not paid the taxes
assessed on the road clearly violating
their promise made to the people of
the county and the court.
The county court contiding in the
promise they made to pay the taxes
on the road, subscribed for the stock.
and gave trsasls. made Mr. Mcty com
missioner to take charge OF the bends
but before the same WAS delivered
by Mcty to the railroad company
Gortlen, Wagner, FuIkcr, Sparks
johnson, and Il number of othci
men sued out an injunction writ t..
restrain him from delivering the
bon,,s to the railroad company before
Judge Wilson the circuit judge OF
Scotland county. This WAS about
September 2Otll, 1871.
After Mcty was enjoine,l he went
to Warsaw, Illinois, AMI delivered
the bonds to the railroad company
Drake and Hill gave Me.y All in,!em
nificd bond to insure him from al,
loss or harm that might grow out OF
the Injunction suit commence,
against Mety 10y Wagner and others
in Judge Wilson's court.
Gor,ten. Wagner and others tool
change of venue from Wilson S cour
in Scotland county, to Shelby county
before Judge Redd, Judge OF the cir
cult court of that county. R.dd de
cree was, that the bonds issued l.,
the county court of Scotland county
to the NJ. |. & y. r. r., WAS issuet
without any authority of law, an.
that Mcty should return said bomb
to the county court, and that Tx
county court should cancel them.
Hill aud Drake, the parties Net,
delivered the bonds to, took an APP
peal from the circuit court Of Shelj,
county to the Supreme court of Mis-
souri,, AMI the Supreme court con
firmeI the decree of Judge Rcdd
The bond suit WAS tried on It's merits
with all the facts before the court il
relation to the bonds and The deere,
rendered declaring the bonds wcr
issued without any authority Of law
and by the highest court i'll the state
No appeal was taken from that court
aud the time having expired to tax
All appeal. Where IS the possih!.
chance to ever collect the bonds. SEE
Mo. reports, Vol. 60, 1879, p. $50.
While this suit about the legait'
of the bonds was pending in the Su
premc court of Missouri, the mel
that held the bonds clipped off tn
overdue coupons, and brought suit ii
the district court of the United State
at St. Lonis, Il believe this was call
ell the Thomas suit,) before Jul e
Treat, the county court counc,iet
Ehmonson, and employed Broadheas
& McCrary rs attorneys, to dcfcnt
> the county, $50 have been informed.
John {. Colin $ was president of Thu
county court at the time (the above
suit has reference to the coupons de
| tachcd from the bonds this Thomas
, suit went against the county, and il
, favor of the plaintiff
THOMAS AICALLIsTER.
CoNYERs, March 9, 2S91.-Co,
tyers sub-union met February 26tl