The semi-weekly messenger., 1908-01-07
THOSE SPECIAL TAX BONDS.

The Messenger on last Sunday gladly
availed itself Of the opportunity to
commend the action OF our governor
for his manly and patriotic reply To
the men who are seeking TO force the
state to pay what are known AZ tn.
special TAX bonds, being certain state
obligations which were illegally is
sued and fraudulently disposed OF un-
der alleged authority of the conven-
ton of 1868 and OF the legislature OF
the same year.
These bonds are Of very different
nature from those on which was based
the famous law suit of South Dakota
against North Carolina. The state had
never failed to recognize the validity
of the latter and had settled many of
that class years before that suit was
brought and would have settled thoss
involved in the suit along with the
others OF that class which she set
tied satisfactorily TO their holders had
they been presented for such settle
ment; but the holders refused to pre-
sent them and held off for years, fin
ally trying TO force the state TO pay
them in full with the many years OF
accrued interest The holders of those
just about what was received by the
owners Of the others of the same class
who had come in and made settlement
with the state under the compromise
act Of 1879 The state had gotten value
received for those bonds and had used
the money on state improvements in
the way of railroad building. She
had never attempted TO repudiate
them, but, because Of her impoversh-
ment by the war between the states
and the thieving of the party in power
during reconstruction days, she asked
the holders of those bonds to accept
less than their face value-principal
and accrued interest-for them. This,
many Of the bOndhClders did. The
suit by South Dakota was on some of
those bonds whose holders refused the
Cpfo o. -
through the scheming of Marion But
lei, induced that state to accepts them
as a gift in order that a suit could
be brought on them against the state,
an individual having no right to bring
such suit Those bonds have been
paid.
AS we said above, the state has never
denied it's liability on those bonds;
but as to the special tax bonds. it has
by solemn declaration in it's constitu-
ton denied for good reasons its Eabil-
ity for one cent toward their payment
in the following amendment to the
state constitution:
The state shall never assume or
pay or authorize the collection OF
any debt or obligation, express or i'm
piled, incurred in aid of insurrection
or rebellion against the United States
or any claim for the loss or emancia-
patton Of any slave; nor shall the gen
eral assembly assume or lay, or au-
thOIiZe the collection of any tax to
pay, either directly or indirectly, eX-
pressed or implied. any debt or bond,
incurred, or issued by the authority Of
the convention of the year one thou
sand eight hundred and siXty-eight,
nor any debt or bond incurred or is
sued by the legislature of the year
one thousand eight hundred and sixty
eight, either at its special session of
the year one thousand eight hum
dred and siXty-eight, or at it's
regular sessions of the years one
thousand eight hundred and sixty
eight and one thousand eight hundred
and siXty-nine and one thousand
eight hundred and seventy, except the
bonds issued to fund the interest on
the old debt Of the state. unless the
act proposing to pay the same shall
have first been submitted to the peo-
pie, and by them ratified by the vote
of q majority of all the qualified voters
of the state, at q regular election held
for that purpose.