The herald-advance. (Milbank, S.D.) 1890-1922, 1916-12-29
Uf BONO CASE
DAkOTA-NORTH CAROLINA BOND
ISSUE BROUGHT TO THE
FRONT AGAIN.
HAPPENINGS OF THE STATE
What 10 Going On Here and There
That Is Of Interest to the Read
ers Throughout South Da-
kota and Vicinity.

The South Dakota-North Carolina
statewide concern in the sunshine
state during the legislative sessions
Of 1907 and 1903, has reached tho
national house of representatives
through the introduction by Con-
gresham Dillon Of a bill to prevent
states from ~trafGcking in repudiated
bonds.
The fact that the republic Of Cuba
recently has instituted in the United
States supreme court a suit against
South Carolina for the purpose OF re
covering S2.186,13o representing
principal and interest on bonds is-
sued by North Carolina, has prompt
ed Congressman Dillon to introduce
the bill. Also his connection with
the case when South Dakota became
involved in the North Carolina
deal" has been a compelling factor
in persuading him to endeavor to
make impossible further cases OF
similar import. His bill provides:
In all cases where n state
seeks 70 maintain an original action
against another state in h supreme
court upon any obligation or dis
pute which does not arise directly
between such states, but does arise
between the defendant state and
some individual or corporation that
has transferred such right or obliga-
ton to the complaining state, such
transferee must show, in order to
maintain such suit, that it became
such owner by transfer In good faith
for full value before maturity in the
usual course without any notice of
the dishonor OF such obligation"
In 1901 an act vas passed by the
legislature OF South Dakota that
would allow the state to accept gifts.
Schafer Bros. gave to South Dakota
state brought suit on the bonds and a
recovery was permitted in the su,
preme court Of the United States. An
attempt was made to permit the hold
ers Of such bonds as were not trans.
ferred to obtain a standing in court
~ SIOSG NOliIplotllks LIN NSuAs oAAo'
ed recovery on the part of South Da-
kota. but declined to include the in
dividual holders OF bonds.
During the legislative sessions OF
1907 and 1909 In South Dakota Mr..
Dillon led the fight to return the
money paid on these bonds to the
state OF North Carolina, claiming that
If it was wrong to take the money it
was wrong to keep it. The argu-
ment advanced against a return Of
the money was that the state received
the money from the owners OF the
bonds and not from North Carolina,
and IL a eturn was made 1t should
be made to the persons who gave the
bonds to South Dakota. A number
Of these ~repudiated bonds were after
ward offered to South Dakota, hut tie
state refused to accept them.
Through the influence of Mr.. Dillon
tho legislature repealed the law per-
hitting gifts Of this character. He
now introduces this bill in congress
to prevent states from t~rafiicking in
repudiated bonds.
The Deadwood assay office will
continue to live, thanks to the ener-
gy OF Congressman Candy and Dillon.
who were successful in putting back
in the legislative bill the item OF
$500 necessary to continue the Of
flee in operation. The appropriation
committee of the house refused to
incorporate this item In the bill.
When the bill reached the floor OF the
house, Congressman Candy intro
duced an amendment replacing the
$500 appropriation. Both he and
Congressman Dillon spoke in fav9r
OF the reinstatement Of the item. de-
claring that South Dakota, being the
fourth state In the Union in the pro.
duction OF gold and silver should not
be Disseminated against. The Candy
amendment carried by q vote OF 81
to IL.