The Topeka state journal., 1905-03-23
IT IS REVIVED.
State VIII Try to Collect Doug
las County Bonds.
There Are 100000 Worth of
Them in Default.
WAS TO SECURE *. u.
Issued for Purpose of Locating
the University.
Repudiated Securities Are Held
by School Fund.
WAS TO SECURE X. U.

Attorney General Coleman has made
an application to Judge Smart in the
Douglas county district court to revive
the suit of the state against the city of
Lawrence on the $100, 600 delinquent
bonds of the city of Lawrence which the
state school fund owns. The applica-
ton was granted and MIR. Coleman
states that he will insist on Judgment
for the interest and principal of the
bonds.
Away back in the days when Law
renee was trying to get the state uni
versity permanently located there, the
town offered 100000 in bonds for the
university if the state would locate it
there. This was done and the bonds
were sold to the state school fund. Law
renee paid the interest on the bonds
for a good many years, and then got
tired of the bargain. When it had paid
an amount in interest equal to the face
of the bonds, it refused to pay any more
on the claim that the legislature had re-
ieved it from further payments.
In the meantime, however, the state
school fund has been holding the bonds,
and as the constitution says the school
fund shall never be diminished, it is inn
possible for the legislature or anyone
else to compromise the face of any
bonds held by it The matter has been
dragging along since 1890 and the city
of Lawrence has never paid any atten-
ton to the bonds, paying neither inter-
est nor principal. In 1893 Governor Le-
yelling directed that suit should be
brought on the bonds, but it was never
prosecuted to a conclusion. Under the
Stanley adTninistrationAss AssiStantAttorney
General Hamilton dug up the entire his
tory of the transaction with a view to
cushing it, but when Mr. Coleman came
into office it was dropped.
At the time of the infamous COmanche
county bond deal last year the State Jour-
nal called attention to this Lawrence
school fund was fiim1iaNlued and nothing
was ever done about it. There was never
any dispute about the legality of the Law
renee bonds and the city got university
in return for them. On the other hand
the Comanche bonds were issued in fraud,
end the county not only never got any
thing in return n the face ce the bonds,
but it is called upon to add a great
bondsEinterest that accumulated during
the ten years before the county had a sin
Lawrence is relieved from the payment of
its bonds. Comanche county certainly
@ 9gt to be we're reeysd from on it BBayng pa dne
Mr.. Coleman now seems to have come
to the conclusion that something ought TO
be done about the Lawrence city bonds
and he is thersfo-e reViving the suit 20
compel their payment The delinquent in
1t is claimed in Lawrence that the bonds
were issued, not to get the university per-
nranently located there, but tc tide the
university through some hard times, and
for that reason the city ought not to be
compelled to paw thcm. TIE act Of the
legislature under which the city refuses
to pay the bonds tried to transfer the debt
from the city of La vrence TO the hoard of
regents OF the university, but il has ht en-
so universally rec )snize1 as uncunSJltu-
tional that no effort was ever made to
carry o1it its provIs'ons.
\ peculiar thing about these bonds is
that they are not included in the list of
delinquent bonds made out by the state
AUDITORS Office last summer. The law re-
duires that in August of each year the
state auditor shall list the delinquent
bonds s found IN the state treasurer's Of
fee The list as published in the auditors
biennial report for 1902 shows these bonds.
amounting to 100000, due July l. 1900. The
list of delinquent bonds as made up Au-
gust g. 1904, does not show these bonds
all.