The Florence tribune., 1900-11-03
STATEMENT OF FACTS.

to build from Tucson to Globe. Ari- zona.
 The Supervisors of Pima county were directed by the Arizona legisla- ture on February 2l, 1883, to issue bonds to promote the construction of this railroad.
 tSee' Act No. 35, page 6l, Twelfth Legislative Assembly of Arizona.)
 Bonds lo the amount of $I50, 1000 were issued by Pima county and in some way got into the possession of the railroad company.
 The road was never operated or built, and Pima county did not get one dollars benefit from it.
 All the bonds were declared void by the Supreme Court of the United States on October %, 1894.
 (See case of Lewis vs. Pima county, l55 U. S., 54)
 The Funding Bill of June 6, 1896, was passed by Congress when N. o, Murphy was the delegate from Ari- zona.
 tSee 20 U. s. Statute, 262.
 Under this Funding Bill the Supreme Court of the United States held on January 8, 1899, that the bonds had been legalized and that it was the duty of the Loan Commissioners of Arizona to fund the bonds.
 (See case of Utteret al. vs. Franklin ct al., 172 U. S., 4l6.)
 Therenpon the Arizona legislature in March, 1899, adopted memorial re- garding these bonds, reciting among other things that:
 Whereas, the said Arizona Narrow Gauge railroad was never built and never existed, and Pima county has never received any consideration what ever for the sail so-called bonds, and the entire scheme of the said bond issue was fraud without any ele- ment Of merit or good faith, and Whereas, it was by all of the legisla- ture passing said memorial (of the Eighteenth Legislative Assembly, and by the Governor of Arizona at the time, and by the delegate in Con gress from Arizona, believed that all said bonds so issued by Pima county to the Arizona Narrow Gauge railroad were res adjudicata by the said decision of the Supreme Court of the United States, and that none of the said bonds could be thereafter validated, and
 Whereas, said memorial was intended to apply only to certain railway bonds of two other counties in Arizona where the aided railways were actually con structed, and not to the said bonds so issued by Pima county, as to which none of the statements or reasons in said memorial applied, and which bonds were then as now believed to be with out consideration, unjust, fraudulent and void;
 Therefore, we most strongly urge upon the Senate and House of Repre- sentatives of the United States of America to pass such legislation as will exclude from the provisions of the act of Congress of June 6, 1896, and from any and all other legisla- tion by Congress, the said bonds so issued by Pima county to the Arizona Narrow Gauge Railroad company, so that neither said act of June 6, 1896, or any other act will be construed so as to validate the said bonds issued by Pima county.
 (See House Memorial No. 1, Twen- tieth Legislative Assembly of Arizona, page S990.
 In order to prevent the funding of these bonds the same Assembly passed Act No. 32, ito abolish the Loan Com mission and to Repeal Sundry Laws relating thereto"
 (see Acts Twentieth Legislative As sembly. page 39.
 Governor Murphy vetoed this re- pealing Act.
 The Legislature on March 13, 1899, passed the bill over his veto.
 (See Act No. 32, above mentioned
 The amount of principal and accrued interest claimed as now due on these fraudulent bonds is over $2Sl, 900.
 If these bonds are funded into 50 year bonds, the people of Pima and Santa Cruz counties will have to pay over $14,000 of interest each year for 50 years, when the principal will be due-a total of over $981 900.
 ISN,T TT A CORKER2