The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1904-02-09

SAASAASS uD4A III ID vi
vlded between the Panama Canal discussion anc
the early guns of the Presidential campaign;
of Southern problems, the price of cotton is still
paramount; while in North Carolina interest cen.
tres in the South Dakota bond suit, decided ad.
versely to North Cardinals contention last week.
The South Dakota Bond Suit.
From the best information we have been able
10 get, the history of the South Dakota bond
suit, briefly stated, is about as follows: The
Legislature of 1S66'67 (Which was, be it re-
membered, elected by the white people of the
State before negro suffrage brought the carpet
Dagger into power) issued $1,5OO,O 900 in bonds
to aid In the construction of the Western North
Carolina Railroad, giving a second mortgage on
the States interest in the road to secure the
payment of the bonds. Now the building of the
railroad, as a p~roft-making investment, was at
that time a rather doubtful undertaking. and a
second mortgage as security did not appeal very
strongly to investors. Hence, the stock sold for
only about 25 per cent of the face value. Then
the deluge came, and the Reconstruction legisla-
lures plunged the State almost hopelessly into
debt. When the people regained control from
the carpet-baggers in 1877, they took a reckoning
and set themselves to the task of clearing off the
State debts. Utterly fraudulent bonds they re-
pudlated outright, but all debts honestly made
they resolved to pay. And as it was clear that
this 81 100000 of 1867 North Carolina Railroad
bonds, secured by the second mortgage on the
States interest, had been honestly issued, the
Legislature resolved to pay the owners as much as
IT appeared these owners had paid for the stock
20 cents on the dollar. Practically all the stock
holders, except the Schaefer Company of Now
Wall al
ork' with two hundred and forty 81 1000 bonds,
accepted the compromise offer. The Schaefers,
however have waited all these years hoping, by
some means or other, to get the face value of the
bonds plus the interest. But they have been stay
ed from legal action by the constitutional pro-
vision which prohibited an individual from suing
a State. In this quandary, they resorted to a
sharp scheme. Assuming that a State can sue
a State, even if an individual cannot, the Scbac-
fers gave ten of the bonds to the University of |
South Dakota, and that Commonwealth instituted |
suit against North Carolina for payment in fulI |
Ex-Governor Daniel l.. Russell, who-be it said
to his shame-seemst to have engineered this suit
against the Commonwealth while holding the high
office of Governor, was one of the counsel for
South Dakota and ex-senator Butler was an
other. The North Carolina officials made . sinh
born fight, but the Supreme Court of the United
States, by a vote of ) to +, decides that South
Dakota can collect.
Now the question aries as to what will be done
with the other two hundred and forty S1O 600
The owners, who as individuals can pet
only - cents on the dollar-$62, OOO-can. bv DIV
my them to some State institution, force their
at the face value of each bond nlue
$l''4O in interest, or about $4,000 in all. And
IT seems not improbable that some of our will
and woolly Commonwealth will be willing to en-
ter INTO the scheme for a division of the spoils.
ouch a onsummation-mor than a half million