Year: 1879

The next, according to the re
port.of the committee, is that if
the State is liable for these IN
struments at all, she is only sec


ondarily liable. Who is first Ii.
able? If there is a party secon.
darby liable, there must be /:
party primarily liable. Who is
that party? ] hold this instru-
ment up fer inspection. / ex.


anime itscarefully and find the
great seal of the State and The
signatureoft the Governor uponit


Mr.. Clapp read the bond show
ing upon its face that the State
promises to pay.


Now, Mr.. Chairman, sitting


as a Judge to decide tie law Of
this case and TO instruct the jury
how would You settle that ques.
ton? How would any man Ct
common sense who had never
looked in a law book? | say
that the statement Of the fact
that the State is secondari-
ly liable implies that somebody
is primarily liable. When you
look for secondary liability, you
look On the back Of the paper
that is where the gHarantor, the
man who intends to become Sec
ondarily liable by all the rules
of commercial paper, signs his
name. Lock On the back of this
.instrument-blank. But here
on the face blazes cut the great
seal of the State, viii; The SIGMA
ture ef the Governor. This
throws the whole burden upon
the State prima fdcia, the most
solemn evidence which can pos
sibly be presented. But they
say you have compounded war
interest. | said in the minority
report that this question Of the
suspension Of interest was be-
tween the belligerents. For if
| pay money during war to a
citizen Of a hostile State, | am
furnishing the sinews Of war to
my adversary. But does that
have anything to do with the in
terest owing by the belIigerents
themselves? So far as they are
concerned, the law takes no
knowledge Of its being interrupt
ted.


My friend referred to the cor
respondence between Jefferson
and Hammond. Mr.. Jefferson
was told that if he undertook to
avoid treaty stipulations by ta-
king shelter behind State laws,
it would be regarded as a cdsus
beUi, and, as a matter of fact
and history, the United States
paid the claims. If you reject
these bonds because they are
given for interest, will you not
have to go back and pay the in
terest Oh the original obligation?
What has released you from it?
l think before you get through
with that you would be very
willing to pay this interest.


As to the argument about the
signature Of the Brownlow bonds,
suppose he did not sign them
with his own hand? Because
some one took the hand of Brown
low, trembling with age and dis
ase,and affixed his signature will
you account it a forgery? Oh,
no. There is no lawyer in the
State that would undertake to
make such a defense as that in
a court Of justice.


They say that the legislatures
were fraudulent, corrupt and
bribed. 1t is greatly to be de-
plored that the agents cf the
people should prove false to their
high trust, but who is to suffer
by it? If my agent, authorized
by me, commits fraud upon an
innocent party, where does the
law place the suffering? Why,
upon tie man who causes the
suffering. You are bound to
put your finger on some specific
act of bribery. You have done
less towards assailing the Brown
low Legislature than its success
ors of 1869-70. We request
you to be specific in so grave a
charge as this. The testimony
fails to fix the charge of bribery
on a single member Of the Leg
islaturc. The only specific case
was that Of a member bribed by
Bearden, and that member show
ed he had, as sworn to by him,
returned the bribe and voted a
gainst the bill for which he was
expected to give his vote.


Hurriedly prepared, it would
be matter of surprise if the
minority report were not open to
criticism, but it shows upon its
face careful examination re-
ferred to by the majority report.
It's soundness as to the law, if |
may be pardoned for stating it, is
sustained by testimonials that
came to me unsolicited from diff
ferent portions of the State, and
from lawyers who stand at the
head of the profession, and now,
after all the official records have
1