The semi-weekly messenger. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1897-1908, 1905-07-07

As dII IheH WHO deaIt with the spe-
Ia tax bonds We're required TO look to
~ legality and constitutionaIity of
their issue, they had notice of the lin
itatlon on the power of the general as
SeInDIy 10 impose taxes: and the taxes
imposed by these special tax bonds
amounted TO 81 cents on the hundred
dollars or property, which Wa largely
il excess OF the power Of the general
assembly to lay. So the public had no.
tice that this taxation was beyond the
power of the legislature and ~unconsti-
tutional, and they had notice that the
legislature had no power to issue any
bond without a special tax, the bonds
OF the state not being then at par.
And those who dealt in those bonds
after February, 1870, also had notice
OF the repeal of the acts under which
they were issued.
Bribery, fraud, illegality, swindIinc.
characterized the whole proceeding
and you, Mr.. Carlyle, with YOUR big
cub, now demand your money or
your life"
NOScitur a sociis.
Vt the ensuing election the demo-
Gratis were successful and the policy
OF the state became fixed not to rec
ognize any obligation on the part ct
the people to pay these bonds. They
gradually sank in value until at length
they were quoted on Wall street, with
Gu sales, at three cents on the dollar.
linen the aid Of The Federal court was
o and suits were brought against
the state by the bOndhOlders. In one
suit they sought to make the state
treasurer pay into the Federal court al
moneys that had been collected under
the special taxes" imposed to pay the
interest on these bonds; and in an
other a mandamus vas prayed requ:r-
ing the auditor to include these spec.a!
taxes IN his abstracts for the sheliffs
of the state to collect by.
These proceedings awakened great
public interest, and serious %apprehen-
SiOns were felt lest some action might
be taken by the Federal court that
would force the people to pay the
bonds.
Happily, however, the various suits
relative to these bonds were determln-
ed adversely to the Dondholders. And
IA 1880 an amendment to the constitu-
o was adopted ~embOdying a provis-
IN prohibiting the Legislature from
pay ms III A1OIlCSo OH IhSOC DOItdS
without first submitting the question
to the people OF the state.
But still the bondholders did not re-
linquish hope, and Morton, Bliss and
Company brought a suit against che
state which failed.
One Of the difficulties in recovering
judgment against the state on these
bonds is the provision in the consUi-
49, - - - ~ - H. Tf.4+
that no state shall be sued in a Federal
court by a citizen of another state. 10
8fank that, various northern states
Ypassed laws authorizing suits to he
brought in the name Of these states
on the bonds Of other states held by
their citizens; but the Supreme court
OF the United States decided hat that
arJifice would not answer. Another
turn was taken in the suit of Temple
Us. North Carolina. Temple was a cit
iZen of the state and Judge Bond neld
that as he was a citizen of North Car
DINA that the inhibition of the cOnsti-
tuition of the United States did not ap-
ply, and he therefore gave judgement
against the state; but the Supreme
court of the United States decided
against that view. AS a last reSOrt,the
bOndhOlders secured certain states tC
provide for receiving donations of de
faulted bonds, which thus would be
one the property Of those states duC
could be sued on by those states in thG
Supreme court of the United States.
And it is under such an enactment
Of the state of New York that the pres
ent movement is threatened.
From his narration it Will sufficient
" appear that the acts authorizing
the issue of these special tax bonds
were conceived in sin and brougn'
forth in iniquity. They were thu
fruits Of a conspiracy to d%efraud, The
result of bribery and corruption.
Moreover, they have not the warrar7
-vG the constitution of 1868. Sector
y of article 5 Of the constitution o.
1868. reads: 1.-The General Assembly
shall levy a cap!tation tax on every
male inhabitant of the state over TWEEN
ty-one and under fifty years of age
which shall be equal on each to To-
tax On property valued at $500 IN cash
The commissioners of the several couil
ties may exempt from capitatiOn ta2
in special cases on account of pOvert,
and infrmity, and the state and coun
ty c%apitatiOn tax combined shall neVe'
exceed $500 on the head"
The limitation on taxation embTac
ed in this section is therefore that th'
tax on 100000 of property shall nevc
exceed $500. 1t is plain and specific
The tax on S100 of property for stat
and county purposes, cannot under TIL
constitution exceed sc % cents, n
matter how this tax may be divide
between the state and the counties.
There is a direction for laying
specific annual tax to form a sinkin:
fund for the payment Of interest
There is also a direction that the stat
shall have no power to contract an.
new debt except IN an emergency, IN
til the bonds of the state shall be a
mar. unless it shall in the same BIZ
levy a special tax to pay the interes
at maturity.
However incOnvenient the limitation
+o-ofion NAV no the Limitation If