Year: 1877




the deception; and we have no
doubt that some members of the
companies were similarly deceived.


As for the allegation that the
work performed was not sufficient
to entitle the companies to the bonds,
public opinion, at the time, was di-
vided, and even those officially au-
thorized to examine the work were
not, we believe unanimous in their
opinions; but the preponderance Of
evidence seems to have been in fa-
vor Of the claim of the companies
that the work was performed. We
must recollect in this connections
that there may properly be wide
latitude in opinion as to what consti-
tutes a sufficient road-bed. Amongst
engineers there seems to be no de-
finite standard even yet, and in
many places in the west roads have
been laid on ground which had hard
ly been disturbed. But it is certain
the State accepted the work and issued
the bonds.


There is no doubt but that the old
companies were responsible for the
bonds and interest. Nobody denies
this. But the State forestalled recourse
upon them by the bondholders, in that
it forcclosed its mortgages against them,
possessed itself of their property, and
held the same as its own. What
would be thought of & man who should
loan his own note for $4,000, taking as
security a mortgage on the borrowers s
farm; and after the latter had traded
these notes away to other parties for
valuable considerations, and failed to
redeem them or pay interest there upon,
should foreclose his mortgage, take
possession of the farm and sell or give
it away to still other parties; and, then,
when his notes were presented to him
for payment, should say: "Why
will not pay these, you did not get
them of me, but of the man to whom
loaned them. Go to him fer your pay !;
owe you nothing?" Would it not ap-
pear that he was legally and equitably
responsible for the payment Of the notes,
even though he did not derive any ad-
vantage from the foreclosure and seizin
in consequence of his having voluntari-
ly given the property away?


This is precisely the case with these
bonds. They were issued, as is known,
with this assurance: "And the faith
and credit of the State are hereby pledg-
ed for the payment of the interest and
the redemption of the principal there
off, This is the language Of the con.
stitutional amendment voted upon and
adopted almost unanimously by the peo-
pie. The companies gave them to con-
tractors and others in return for work
done, and, in many instances, the lat
ter traded them away at a greater or
less discount, sometimes as low as ten
cents on the dollar. (Mr. Chamber
lain received his as contractor for max
ing the road-bed of the Central road, if
we are not mistakenly The rapid de-
probation of the bonds was conse.
quence of the refusal of the legislature
of 1859 to provide for the payment of
their interest. The companies could
not pay it, and of course, the bonds de-
preciated and thousands of dollars of
bank currency based upon them also
became valueless.


The bonds bear upon their face the
declaration of the State responsibility,
and the faith of the State must suffer
from their non payment. It cannot be
otherwise. They cannot be successfully
repudiated. Therefore, we hope that the
people will, on the 18th of June, author
ize the settlement Of this question on
the basis proposed, and that we will
soon be forever done with the "old rail-
road bonds