The Caucasian. (Clinton, N.C.) 188?-1913, 1910-09-08

the state got q higher price for the
bonds than It could have otherwise
received
Nov let Us look at the security.
II Is very valuable. The State -
nov, and has for many years. been
getting an income from this security
tits stock in the North Carolina Rail-
road AN income large enough 10
pay the interest on the first mortgage
bonds and have sfs.soo each year
left over. The interest on these
"ten-share second mortgage bonds"
should have been paid out OF this
money which the State has kept. In
short. the security pledged by the
State TO make those bonds sell at
high price is valuable enough TO pay
both the principal and the interest in
full OF the first mortgage bonds and
also the second mortgage bonds and
for the State still TO have left over
$4,000, 900. And these are the bonds
that the State repudiated and refused
to pay while keeping every dollar OF
the large income from the security.
These are the facts that were
brought out in the suit before the
Supreme Court. Is it strange that
the Supreme Court, with these facts
before it, held that these were hon
! est bonds, and that the State was not
only in honor bound to pay them,
but that the State could no longer
hold back the valuable security and
the income from it, which honestly
belonged to those who had bought
her bonds?
When these facts were placed be-
fore the public by the Supreme Court
then the editor of the News and OBJ
server Matched and published another
lie, charging that Marion Butler was
also the attorney for the special tax
bond, and other fraudulent bonds is
sued by the carpet-bag Legislature.
He had no foundation for such a
charge, so he was wilfully and ma
liciously guilty of classifying. Mr..
. Butler prepared a statement giving
the facts as to the difference between
the second mortgage bonds and the
carpet-bag bonds, and stating that
he had refused to act as attorney for
any of the carpet-bag bonds. This
statement the News and Observer re-
fused to publish, but, on the other
: hand, continued to make the baseless
charge. The editor Of that paper
knew then, as he knows now, that
+ Hon. John G. Carlisle, the late Secre,
a tary Of the Treasury, was the attor.
q ney for the carpet-bag syndicate an6
: that Mr.. Butler refused to be asso
: ciated with him as attorney Or to bt
!. connected with the carpet-bag bond
d syndicate in any way. Indeed he de
n clared that he would have nothin,
a to do with those bonds and was op
= posed to their collection.
It The editor of that paper, now con
d tinuing this TRADE of misrepresenta
e ton and abuse, charges in the ed
If itorial clipped above that Mr.. But
l. Ter, when he advised his clients t
a. make a donation of some of thei
se bonds to some State, was guilty @
ID working Z" fraud upon the jurisdit
re ton of the Supreme Court to enabl
e. This charge is not only false br
a asinine to the last degree. 1t is
err deliberate attempt to deceive the pei
at pie. The attorneys whom the Stat
d. of North Carolina employed to al
in pear before the Supreme Court I
,h urge that the State be allowed to r.
I'D pudiate its honest debt and to kee
a it's security which had been pledge
Tn to the purchase of the bonds, urge
an in the Supreme Court that to tai
no jurisdiction in this case would be
In work fraud upon the jurisdictic
ny of the Supreme Court. The alto
ed neys instead of advising the State
he pay this honest debt and preser7
,f- the good name and credit that IL
it's bonds were fraudulent, and that II
ad State did not get value received, b
90 attempted to have the State contin1
Iat to refuse to pay it's honest debt
ne means of technicalities, and this W
Die the chief technicality urged in tn