USA > Georgia > The history of the State of Georgia from 1850 to 1881, embracing the three important epochs: the decade before the war of 1861-5; the war; the period of Reconstruction, v. 2 > Part 15
Note: The text from this book was generated using artificial intelligence so there may be some errors. The full pages can be found on Archive.org (link on the Part 1 page).
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3 | Part 4 | Part 5 | Part 6 | Part 7 | Part 8 | Part 9 | Part 10 | Part 11 | Part 12 | Part 13 | Part 14 | Part 15 | Part 16 | Part 17 | Part 18 | Part 19 | Part 20 | Part 21 | Part 22 | Part 23 | Part 24 | Part 25 | Part 26 | Part 27 | Part 28 | Part 29 | Part 30 | Part 31 | Part 32 | Part 33 | Part 34 | Part 35 | Part 36 | Part 37 | Part 38 | Part 39 | Part 40 | Part 41 | Part 42 | Part 43
" I felt fully justified in saying this much, for the reason that I was the original counsel consulted in the case, and they seemed to have relied much upon my judgment, and though I was upon the bench, under the laws of the State, I could in no event pre- side in the case, and therefore felt at perfect liberty, so far as the case was concerned, to confer with the heirs or their counsel in reference to their case, and to give them any advice which, in my judgment, would promote their interest. But I know of no unfair or illegal means used by any one to carry the bill through the Legislature.
" A proposition was submitted by Gen. Austell and others to give $100,000 for a quit- claim title to the property. It was my opinion at the time, and the opinion of counsel for the Mitchells, that this proposition was not intended in good faith, but it was ouly thrown in to embarrass the settlement between the heirs and the State-as Austell owned property fronting the park and wished it kept open. It was submitted in such a shape that I was satisfied the parties could not be compelled to carry it out if the com- promise had failed between the State' and the heirs.
"But I was equally well satisfied, if it was made in good faith, that, in a pecuniary point of view, it was the interest of the State to accept the proposition of the heirs and reject that of Austell and his associates, for the following reasons : First, there could be no question about it that the land upon which one-fourth of the passenger shed, a very extensive structure, as already stated, which cost about $150,000 at the time of its completion, stood upon the land which the State had conveyed away to the Macon and Western railroad, and which, in the compromise between the city and heirs, was then controlled by the heirs, and if the compromise had not been made with the State there could have been no question as to that part of it, that the State could have been ejected from it, as she had previously sold it for other land for the location of her depot-which
491
GOVERNOR BROWN'S LETTER TO THE PUBLIC.
would have compelled the removal of the entire car shed. This would have been at a very heavy loss and expense to the State.
" In addition to this, I think there is no room for doubt, even if I am wrong as to the right of the Mitchell heirs to recover back the park property from the State, on account of her having abandoned it for railroad purposes, that they did have the right, holding that provision of the deed to be a covenant and not a condition, to restrain the State or her vendee by an action of covenant, or other proper proceeding, from using it for any other purpose than for the original purposes of the grant, to-wit : railroad purposes. And if the State could, in no case, use it for any other purpose, Austell and his -com- panions, as grantees of the State, standing in her shoes, would be bound by the like covenant, and they too could he restrained from making any other use of it.
The decision of the Supreme Court of the State of Georgia, in the case of Thorn- ton vs. Trammell, 39 Ga., 202, where a question arose upon a grant made to the Western and Atlantic railroad, in the city of Dalton, for the location of a depot-though the language of the deed was different from that made by Mitchell-held, that it did not contain a condition, and that the grantor could not recover it back; but the Supreme Court, Warner, J. delivering the opinion, recognizes fully the right of the grantor to enforce the covenant contained in the deed. Numerous authorities might be quoted to sustain this doctrine, that where a conveyance is made for a specific purpose, and the language of the deed is not such as to make a condition subsequent, the party convey- ing may, by action of covenant, restrain the grantee from violating the contract and appropriating it to other uses.
" What then would have been the result if the proposition of Austell & Company had been accepted ? Suppose we admit for the argument that the heirs had no right to recover the property back. It was very clear that they had the right to restrain the use of it for any other purpose than railroad purposes; and it was so situated, that it could not be of any use for railroad purposes. The result must therefore have been that the property would have remained unimproved, and the State, the County, and the city must have lost the taxes which they will perpetually receive from it when it is built up. As the result of the compromise, already, the city has sold off a small portion of the property conveyed to her by the heirs, to John H. James, who has expended in the purchase and the erection of a building upon it, about $75,000. And upon the park property there has been expended, in buildings, largely over a hundred thousand dollars. There are, therefore, over $200,000 of improvements already placed upon the property, as the result of the compromise, upon which the taxes are annually paid to the city, county and State ; and when all the balance of the property is built up, including the portion to which the city's title was quieted, and the portion to which the title of the heirs is quieted, there will probably be a million of dollars' worth of im- provements to be taxed annually. In a few years this will pay the difference between the 835.000 proposed by the heirs, and the $100,000 proposed by Austell & Co. And after the difference is made up, the property will remain perpetually subject to taxation, and will in the end pay to the State many times the difference. Therefore, in a pecuniary point of view alone, the proposition made by the heirs of Mitchell was much the better one for the State, and was so regarded by intelligent members of the General Assembly.
" But in addition to this, the heirs agreed to convey to the State all the portion of the property necessary for a passenger shed, including the part formerly sold by the State to the Macon and Western Railroad, and to which she had not a shadow of title,
492
GOVERNOR BROWN'S LETTER TO THE PUBLIC.
thereby quieting the title to the depot or passenger shed, including the part of it : which no one can contend she had a right prior to the compromise. She has, therefore, in addition to her large income from increased taxes, saved the expense of a lawsuit and the necessity of removing the depot off the land owned by the heirs, or of delivering :: up to them ; and the whole matter is amicably adjusted.
" But suppose the quieting of the title to the depot building, and the taxes on tl. improvements made and to be made upon the property had not even equaled the $65,000 difference between the two propositions, should not an enlightened and liberal Legislature have justly concluded, as the Democrats did at the former session of the same Legislature, that, as the father of these heirs has given the State all she needed for railroad purposes, including the right of way through his land, and the location for a passenger shed, and the property which she had swapped for the present site of her freight buildings, and the State had no sort of use for the balance of it for the purpose intended by the donor, and his heirs were left poor, that it was magnanimous and proper to return the balance, not needed, to them, as an act of justice and . propriety, without regard to the pecuniary bid that venal speculators might have thought proper to interpose in the way of such an act of justice and magnanimity. This was the view, as already stated, which the majority of the Democrats had taken at the previous ses- sion. And if they then thought it just to return it without compensation, surely it is no evidence of bad faith in them and their associates, at a subsequent session, to agree to re-convey it for the sum of $35,000. They might well have made that discrimination in favor of the heirs of him who had donated to the State property that is now worth a very large sum, and which is in daily use by the Western and Atlantic Railroad, when . all must admit the portion returned had been abandoned, so far as the purposes of the grant are concerned, by the donee.
" The above statement gives the substantial facts, so far as they interest the public, in the case of the compromise between the State and the Mitchell heirs, and will, I trust, satisfy all unprejudiced minds, that, so far as I or the other counsel are concerned, we have done them no injustice, but have conferred upon them a substantial and valua- ble benefit. So far as the State is concerned, she has received, as a donation from Mitchell, all the land she needed for the original purposes of the grant, and, in addition to that, has received the further donation of $35,000, in cash, towards the construction of the passenger depot, while she has surrendered only the portion of the property for which she had no earthly use, for the purposes contemplated, either by her or Mitchell, at the time of the conveyance. It is clear, therefore, that the injustice and wrong which have been charged in this transaction, exist only in the diseased imagination of persons controlled by passion, prejudice and vindictiveness towards the parties at interest.
" JOSEPH E. BROWN."
It is not inappropriate to say, that in nothing has there been a more striking change in popular sentiment than in the general condemnation of dueling that now prevails. There has grown up steadily a strong public opinion against this practice, and a man of character and family can refuse to accept the arbitrament of the Code without loss of stand- ing, as was the case years ago.
Many changes took place in the State government. Col. H. P. Far- row resigned as Attorney General. Col. N. J. Hammond, Supreme
Hersam Warner
493
AN INTERESTING WAR INCIDENT OF CAPT. HENRY JACKSON.
Court reporter, was appointed Attorney General. Captain Henry Jackson resigned from the Legislature and became Reporter of the Supreme Court, a position which he continues to fill with marked in- dustry and ability. Both Gen. Hood, in his " Advance and Retreat," and Jefferson Davis on page 340 of vol. 2, of his " Rise and Fall of the Confederacy," relate a unique incident of Henry Jackson at the battle of Sharpsburg, not giving his name, which we supply. Gen. Lawton was commanding Ewell's Division, September 17, 1862, and had relieved Hood's Division in Stonewall Jackson's line. The Federals made a desperate endeavor to break through; corps after corps were hurled against the heroic division. Gen. Lawton sent his only remaining staff officer, Lieutenant Henry Jackson, then a youth of seventeen, to Gen. Hood for assistance. It was a curious and typical demonstration of the polite chivalry of our Southern boys, that in this grim strife Lt. Jack- son dashed up to Gen. Hood, saying, "Gen Lawton sends his compli- ments with the request that you come at once to his support." Lt. Jackson conducted Hood's division to its place, Gen. Lawton and his horse were shot down, and the gallant and ceremonious aid had his General borne from the field, though several men were struck in so do- ing. Chief Justice Lochrane resigned from the Supreme Bench, and Gov. Smith appointed Associate Justice Hiram Warner as Chief Justice, January 19, 1872, and filled the vacancy made by the promotion of Judge Warner, by the appointment of Judge W. W. Montgomery, February 8, 1872. Gov. Smith appointed Professor J. G. Orr, State School Commissioner. This was a most admirable selection. A gentle- man of erudition, energy, sleepless zeal, crystal purity and integrity and fine organizing capacity, Mr. Orr has in the nine years of his continuing incumbency seen the Public School system flourish and grow under his able direction, until its former unpopularity has been wholly changed and its sterling benefits are everywhere admitted.
Gov. Smith offered the place of Attorney General to Col. P. W. Alexander, but that gentleman declined it, and became, as a Secretary of the Executive Department, Chief of his civil staff, a place he filled with tact and ability. Gov. Smith selected as the additional Secretary of the Executive Department, Major James W. Warren, who was also continued in the same responsible position by Gov. Colquitt, and has served continuously for ten years. Major Warren was editor of the Columbus Times. One of the most vigorous and polished writers in the State, industrious, accurate, reliable, possessing a charming genial- ity of nature, and a quiet rich humor, Major Warren has discharged the delicate and responsible duties of his position with grace and ability.
..
494
THE BOND INVESTIGATION.
The legislature elected Hon. Thomas M. Norwood, United States Senator. Mr. Norwood presented his credentials to the Senate of the 4th day of December, 1821, and on the 19th day of December he was admitted to his seat, and the final blow given to the Senatorial hopes of Foster Blodgett.
The legislature had many vital questions before it, but the most important was the bond matter. Senator Thomas J. Simmons and Representative John I. Hall, both introduced bond bills, and finally a measure was passed that required the registration of all bonds to sitt out the bad from the good, under a temporary suspension of interest. A bond committee was appointed, consisting of Thomas J. Simmons, John I. Hall and Gamett McMillan, to conduct this bond investigation. The committee gave public notice, December 12, 1871, and began its sit- tings in Atlanta, March 1, 1872, holding session until May 1, 1872. The committee visited New York and held an extended session there. Voluminous depositions were taken in Europe. An attempt was made to get Gov. Bullock before the committee. The papers contained a paragraph narrating an alleged joke of his, that he had received two invi- tations to meet the Bond Committee and Col. Cumming with his requisi- tion, that he could not visit both, and rather than offend either by accept- ing the other's invitation, he would do the kind thing and see neither.
Col. C. C. Kibbee gave valuable assistance in the investigations of our bond troubles. A gentleman of public spirit, a lawyer of ability and discrimination, and a legislator of uncommon qualifications, careful, searching and devoted to the public interest, Col. Kibbee made an envi- able reputation in the General Assembly. Col. Thomas L. Snead was of great aid to our bond committees, and opened up a vein of informa- tion that would have probably been inaccessible but for him. Every obstacle was thrown in the way of the committee in New York. It was afterwards discovered that they were tracked day and night by skilled detectives employed by the bond-holders to watch and trap them. At- tempts were made to drive them into complaisance. And it was a right creditable fact that this body of gentlemen, unaccustomed to the seduc- tions and tricks of the metropolis, should have carried through their diffi- cult mission so successfully and in such skillful avoidance of the perils set for them.
The committee investigated fully and made an unusually able report. The following table covers their statement of the bonded liability of Georgia, showing the increase under the Bullock rule to have been over TWELVE MILLIONS of dollars.
.
M. Stor
TTO0
495
THE BOND COMMITTEE'S REPORT.
Consolidated Statement of the Public Debt of Georgia, (including endorsed bonds of this State,) on the first day of November, 1871, showing date of issue and maturity of bonds.
When Issued.
When Due.
Amount.
1841 and 1866.
1871
$ 154,500
1842 and 1852 .
1872
730,000
1842 and 1843 .
1873
137,000
1844 and 1848 .
1874
251,500
1858
1878
100,000
1859
1879
200,000
1860
1880
200,000
1861
1881
100,000
1866
1886
3,764,000
1867
1887
165,000
1868
1888
268,000
1870
1890 and 1894
6,380,000
Grand Total of State Bonds
$12,450,000
INDORSED BONDS, INDORSED SINCE JULY, 1868.
To Brunswick & Albany Railroad
$3,300.000
To Bainbridge, Cuthbert & Columbus Railroad
600,000
To Macon and Brunswick Railroad
600,000
To Cherokee Railroad .
300,000
To Cartersville & Van Wert Railroad
275,000
To South Georgia & Florida Railroad
464,000
To Alabama & Chattanooga Railroad
194,000
Grand Total Indorsed Bonds .
$5,733,000
Grand Total State Bonds
12,450,000
Grand Total State Bonds and Indorsed Bonds
$18,183,000
The committee reported in favor of declining to recognize the illegal bonds. The report elicited a full and able discussion. The truth is, that the Georgia bond issue became a national question. The holders of the illegal bonds made every effort to stem and prevent the con- demnation of their securities. The Northern press teemed with articles. The incorrect brand of "repudiation " was applied to the proposed action and the State threatened with utter destruction of her credit. The distinction between the "repudiation " of an honest debt and the refusal to recognize an illegal claim, was purposely confused. Perhaps the strongest speech made in favor of throwing over the fraudulent securities was by the Hon. A. O. Bacon. His portrayal of the Bullock Legislature was a very graphic picture, and his argument against the bad bonds was masterly and conclusive.
The Legislature declared the following bonds to be void:
Gold Bonds in Clews' hands,
$102,000
Gold Bonds, second issue to B. & A. R. R., 1,880,000
Currency Bonds, .
1,500,000
-...
.
496
THE LEGISLATURE OF 1873.
Endorsement B. & A. R. R., $3,300,000
Endorsement Bainbridge C. & C. R. R., 600,000
Endorsement Cartersville & Van Wert R. R., 275,000
Endorsement Cherokee R. R.,
300,000
$7,957,000
The bond question was still agitated. The new Legislature of 18:3 tackled the subject again. Of this body Hon L. N. Trammell was elected President of the Senate, and Hon. A. O. Bacon Speaker of the House. Among the new Senators were Joseph A. Blance, John W. Wofford, W. H. Payne, J. G. Cain, J. M. Arnow, W. A. Harris, S. J. Winn and H. W. Mattox. In the House were J. J. Turnbull, C. A. Nutting, J. H. Hunter, J. B. Jones, G. A. Mercer, Henry H. Carlton, W. D. Anderson, E. F. Hoge, Clark Howell, W. F. Calhoun, George F. Pierce, Patrick Walsh, J. C. Dell, Allen Fort, F. M. Longley, J. C. Clements, H. D. McDaniel, C. S. Du Bose.
Mr. Nutting was the author of the bill for the issue of the twelve hundred thousand of eight per cent. bonds. Mr. G. A. Mercer was an able young lawyer of Savannah, and ayoung man of an unusually clear mind and smooth elocution. Dr. Henry H. Carlton was the author of the bill establishing the Geological Bureau, one of the most valuable measures of the century. He was a strikingly handsome gentleman, and a forcible and ornate speaker. Hon. Patrick Walsh was, and still is, the editor and proprietor of the Augusta Chronicle and Sentinel, now the Chronicle and Constitutionalist. This was the first appearance in public life of Mr. Walsh, who will be a very large figure in Georgia politics, and to whom further reference will be made hereafter. Allen Fort took immediate stand as a young man of mark. F. M. Longley has been judge of the Superior Court, and is a solid young lawyer. J. C. Clement became Senator, and is now a member of Congress, with as much promise of usefulness as any young man in the State. H. D. McDaniel has been repeatedly sent to the Senate since, and has meritedly earned a reputation for substantial judgment and integrity.
Col. Thos. L. Snead of New York came before this General Assembly with the following Bond compromise : 1
" The proposition which I have submitted to the Governor, on the part of certain holders of Georgia bonds, is simply this :
If the State will agree to pay to the holders of the State bonds which have been declared null and void, the sums which these holders have, actually, and in perfect good faith advanced upon or paid for these bonds (that is to say, about $1,500,000 and interest), these parties will guarantee that such action of the State will completely re-establish
497
SNEAD'S BOND COMPROMISE. ,
the credit of Georgia, and enable it to borrow, at seven per cent. per year, all the money which it may need.
They also desire that the Legislature shall declare the readiness of the State to carry out its promises as to the indorsement of the first mortgage bonds of the Brunswick and Albany Railroad Company and the Cherokee Valley Railroad Company, so far, and only so far, as the State is now constitutionally and lawfully bound by such promises ; when these companies shall have complied with all of the requirements of the Constitu ion and laws of Georgia, and shall have also completed their respective roads.
If the State accepts this proposition, it will have to issue about $1,600,000 seven per cent., currency bonds to the holders of the outstanding gold and currency bonds, who undertake to thereupon return to the Treasurer for cancellation-
$1,880,000 gold bonds and interest, equivalent to $2,450,000
Currency bonds 1,500,000 Guaranteed bonds of the Bainbridge, Cuthbert and Columbus Railroad 600,000
Guaranteed bonds of the Cherokee Valley Railroad . 300,000
Guaranteed bonds of the Cartersville and Van Wert Railroad 275,000
Guaranteed bonds of the Brunswick and Albany Railroad 3,300,000
$8,425,000
Which includes every bond that has been declared null and void.
This proposition is made on the part of banks anl capitalists, who own more of the valid bonds of Georgia than of its discredited-one of them alone ( Mr. Russell Sage) hold- ing over $1,000,000 of good and acknowledged bonds, while he owns only $50,000 of those which have been declared null and void.
In this matter I represent the foreign as well as the American bond-holders, and am autliorized to express the acquiescence of the holders of any one of the discredited bonds in the proposed settlement.
THOMAS L. SNEAD, Agent of the Bond-holders.
ATLANTA, February 12, 1873."
This proposition was fully agitated and discussed. It created a deep interest and was presented to the public sense in every possible aspect. The editors of the Atlanta Constitution, E. Y. Clarke and I. W. Avery, addressed a circular letter to the leading men of the State asking their views on this matter. The responses made an interesting and vivid series of letters, presenting the important subject from every possible point of view. Ex-Gov. J. E. Brown, Major Campbell Wallace, Col. James Gardner, Col. John Sereven, T. P. Branch, Col. George Hazle- hurst, Senator T. M. Norwood, Judge David Irwin and Hon. John E. Ward advocated compromise in some shape. Gen. H. L. Benning, Gen. R. Toombs, John II. James, Wm. H. Hull, Ben H. Hill, Col. Wm. M. Wadley, and Herbert Fielder opposed any compromise. Politicians, lawyers, bankers, railroaders and business men were thus consulted and gave a remarkable variety of opinion. Lawyers Brown, Norwood, Irwin and Ward were in conflict with lawyers Toombs, Benning, Ilil!
32
498
LEADING OPINION ON THE BOND COMPROMISE.
and Fielder. Railroaders Wallace, Screven and Hazlehurst differed with railroader Wadley. Banker Branch opposed Banker James.
Mr. Hill took the novel and daring position that none of the Bullock bonds were valid because the Bullock government was the creature of Federal authority and had no right to bind the State, and the United States government should pay these Bullock claims. If, however, the Bullock rule was recognized as valid, then the claims of innocent holders of these bonds should be recognized. The State ought to have referred the holders of the Bullock securities to the Federal govern- ment, and helped them push the claim.
Mr. W. H. Hull thought the void bonds should not -be paid .. He had tried to buy new State sevens in New York, and could not get them for less than ninety cents. The bonds were null, and the State's credit was not affected. Col. Wadley endorsed Mr. Hull's views. Maj. C. Wallace urged the compromise. The bond trouble was affecting the State's credit and all private enterprises.
Gov. Brown's letter was an exhaustive review of the whole subject, covering its legal and business features. His idea was that the equities. of these bonds should be recognized. Some of them were good, and where the State had received the benefit of the money invested in them, the right thing was to assume the obligation. And he urged that the courts should be opened to test the matter.
Gen. Benning declared the only question to be whether the State's credit was affected injuriously. Our credit was not hurt. As for borrowing money he did not wish the State to do it. Col. Gardner had first opposed the bond compromise, but upon investigation changed his mind. Bullock was de facto Governor, and the State's agent. The State must stand up to the acts of its agent so far as the innocent bond- holders had an equitable consideration. The State had enjoyed increase of property through these enterprises, and should pay for it.
Gen. Toombs contended that all of these bonds lacked the vitality of popular consent, and were not in conformity with law or constitution. The public credit was undoubtedly injured some. The bonds would be a constant source of lobby agitation. His idea was to stand by the law, and make a new constitution killing the bonds and stopping lobbying for them. John H. James declared it untrue that the State's credit was hurt. Georgia bonds were selling well. He had tried to buy some at 87 1-2 cents and could not. There was no use for the State to give away this money and add to the taxation.
Need help finding more records? Try our genealogical records directory which has more than 1 million sources to help you more easily locate the available records.