The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1897-03-20
A MISERABLE PIECE OF LITTLE
NESS.

of the. ninety year lease of the
North Carolina Railroad. The opinions
printed in these columns from Demo-
cratic lawyers show that the attempted
government by injunction has aroused
the peope of the State as has nothing
since the invasion of the rights of the
States by sending troops here after the
war. AS long as the Governor stands
on the Democratic platform fighting
government by injunction" he will have
the support in the fight of all men who
endorsed that plank in that platform, the
truest exponent of Democratic principles
ever adopted by Democratic conven-
ton.
Some of the Southern Railway agents
have discerned that the Governor has
retained an eminent Democratic lawyer
to represent the State in the contest
against government by injunction, and
has paid him a retainer of $3.50. And
forthwith these little whipper-snappers
set up a cry that the Governor is doing
something very wrong. 1t is a miserable
piece Of littleness and meanness as the
following statement of the contest shows;
Two suits have been brought in the
Circuit court at Greensboro, in both
of which the Southern Railway Company
(which is the real mover), is seeking to
preclude the State of North Carolina
from going into its own courts to protect
the rights of it's own people. The suit
is entitled the Southern Railway Com
pany against the North Carolina Rail
road Company, d. L. Russell and
Zebulon Vance Walser. The plaintiffs
seek in this suit to enjoin and restrain
the Governor Of the State and the At
torney General from bringing any action
in our own courts to test the legality of
the lease.
The bill of complaint is filed by John
G. Carlisle, late Secretary of the Treas
ury under President Cleveland, and the
leading counsel will be the new firm COM
posed of President Cleveland, Carlisle
and Stetson, the last named being the
New York lawyer, who managed the
bond transactions under Cleveland's adj
ministration.
Carlisle in this suit, which involves the
gain or loss of $4,000 annually for 80
years to the people of North Carolina,
%
or more and will get ultimately for his
firm not less than $4,000. This is about
what the Southern will pay besides pro-
badly ite extra allowance to its North
Carolina counsel, f. FL. Busbee, who has
generally been we'll paid when employed
by the State.
The other bill is filed by the Trust
Company, which holds the bonds, issued
by the Southern Railway Company. 1t
is inspired by the Southern Railway
Company, and is intended to tie the
hands of the company before new
directory takes charge, lest the lease
may be declared void.
The bill of complaint in the last named
case Central Trust Company VS.. \. Z.
r. r. ct ALL, is drawn by leading law
firm in New York, and it is probable that
they will receive out of the tribute paid
by the Southern shippers to this great
monopoly not less than ten thousand
dollars as retainer, and five times as
much as fee besides the liberal fee that
ought to be paid to Battle & Mordecai,
the local attorneys.
When the Southern Railway has so
much at stake that it retains this emil
nent array Of high-priced attorneys, 1t
is the height of impudence for 1t to as
sumo to tell the State who shall represent
it and the fee that shall be paid to save
to the State an unwise, imprudent and
unnecessary gift Of $4,000 annually
for ninety-nine years to rich corpora
ton.
The Governor would be justly con-
demned if he did not employ learned
counsel to resist government by injunc-
tion," and did not seek by every legal
process to make void the 99-year lease.
When there was a mighty conflict mot
involving the grave question Of the SOW
ereignty of the State), to compel great
railroad to pay taxes, the Governor wisely
employed able counsel to represent the
State Tn this crisis. the present Gov
ernor ought to be impeached if he did
not defend the sovereignty of his high Of
fee and the rights Of the people.
The miserable talk of fees is lugged in
to divert attention from the main ques-
tons: ~
i. Do we intend to submit to govern
ment by injunction?
2. Do we propose to quietly allow the
90-year lease to be validated, thus en-
failing an annual tribute Of $4,000