Viewing page 80 of 176

This transcription has been completed. Contact us with corrections.

[7 Columns]
[Column 1]
SPEECH OF MR. TOURGEE,
OF GUILFORD,
On the Relief Ordinance in Convention, Wednesday, January 29th, 1868.
No man was more deeply pledged than himself or his colleague to the relief of the people. From the events of the past seven years relief was absolutely necessary. The future existence of the State perhaps depended on the adoption of measures for relief. He felt bound to say to the Convention, that if adequate relief was not given, nothing but anarchy awaited us. The people will prefer to remain under military rule or any kind of government which will regard their necessities. While he saw this, he could not refrain from opposing the ordinance as reported. In the first place it did not touch the matter in hand, in anything like a comprehensive manner. What is relief? Is it a question between the debtor and creditor, to be decided in favor of the one against the other? That was no the relief to which he was pledged. He was here to give relied to all. He had come here to do as his conscience dictated where his constituents were satisfied or not. Supposed every price debt was wiped away, would the people have relief? It would be a kind of relied that was the most dangerous and fearful tyranny. it would not be the relief that the convention could give- a relief which would build up new North Carolina, in all her beautiful proportions. the North-Carolina which had gone before was dead. What was a State? He had asked the gentleman from Washington to define a State and he had omitted, in his reply one of the essentials of State existence. A State of the American Union is a portion of the territory of the United States inhabited by citizens of the same, united by a body politic, known to, recognized by, and sustaining constitutional relations with, the government of the United States. 
Mr. Jones of Washington interrupting.-
My definition was authorized by the present position of the State.
Mr. Tourgee replied. It was entirely insufficient. It omitted the fact that a State must be a body politic in constitutional relation with the United States. now, just so soon as the Confederate government extended its authority over North-Carolina just so soon the State lost her political organization and constitutional relations. The citizens of North-Carolina became citizens of de facto government, inimical to the United States- and they were alien enemies. This condition of affairs held over until the passage of the reconstruction acts of March 2d, 1867. Her political organization was gone, her constitutional relations were gone,  she was dead. It was folly to say that her functions were suspended. Gentlemen might as well say the functions of the State could be suspended as that the heart life of a man could be suspended. A State with functions suspended is a corpse with human life suspended, and old North- Carolina was dead and buried in the tomb of the Confederacy, whence not even the power of the recording angel could recall the crumbling skeleton. But on the 2nd day of March, 1867, the initial movement was made- not to resurrect the loathsome mass of decay form its tomb, but to build up a new State, a new North- Carolina upon broader and firmer foundations. With the passage of the first act of reconstruction began the organization of this new State  And now this Convention, in his opinion, was clothed with all those powers necessary to accomplish that glorious work. Like Louisiana, when admitted to the Union, it had power over the future and the past. he referred to Louisiana particularly. The case was parallel and pertinent. First the territory of Spain, next the conquered province of France, when her soil was purchased by the young Republic of America, it was declared that unless her Convention reaffirmed all titles and contracts, which depended for validity upon the sanction of a foreign government, that they would pass away, and no Court of the land recognize them as bind-

[column 2]
wants of North-Carolina and must be so regarded. It is the highest duty of this Convention to provide for the protection of all citizens. It is its duty to provide against pauperism, and to use every fair means in its power to do so. If no provision is put in the Constitution to banish pauperism from are North-Carolina, our borders may enclose thousand and thousands of such people who are burdens to any community. Why did he say this? Because it is cheaper for a man to feed himself, than for the State to do it. What then should be done? Give the people s=homesteads? yes, give them a liberal homestead, retrospective in its character. That will be relief of the most substantial and equitable nature. Yet, the learned delegate from Beaufort may consider this a legal heresy.
Mr. Rodman- I agree with you
Mr. Tougree- I am glad to hear it. I am glad to know that the gentleman admits the principle of retrospective homestead. indeed the right is clear. For the public interest this Convention can prove a good and sufficient exemption from all debts to prevent pauperism, educate the youth of the country and support the laboring men of the nation. no one believed more religiously in the payment of debts than he did.- Though some of the "honorable" members of the press had announced him as a defaulter, he paid all the debts that he could and would continue to do so. It is right for a man to coin his life to discharge his honest obligations. There is a inviolable sanctity about such contracts that demand and the sacrifice of every good citizen to liquidate them. But give the people a homestead, exempted from all dents old and new, mot transferable unless by the permission of his wife and also fasten it upon the minor children. This is an enlightened idea, a principle which he hoped all would admit as cheerfully as the delegate from Beaufort had done.
In the case of the West Bridge Company, vs. Dix and other, there was a decision of the Supreme Court which bore directly upon this subject. This company had been authorized and empowered to build a bridge over a river. it seemed that one of the abutments was constructed on one side of the river, which was price property. A suit was brought against the company, on the ground that the State could not give the land to a private corporation. The defense was argued by Daniel Webster, and the following was a portion of the decision in the case:
"No State, it is declared, shall pass a law impairing the obligation of contract; yet, with this concession constantly yielded, it cannot be justly disputed, that in every political sovereign community there inheres necessarily the right and the duty of guarding its own existence and of protecting and promoting the interest and welfare of the community at large. This power and this duty are to be exerted not only in the highest acts of sovereignty. and in the external relations of the governments; they reach and comprehend likewise the interior polity and relations of social life, which should be regulated with reference to the advantage of the whole society. This power, denominated the eminent domain of the state is as its name imports paramount to all price rights vested under the government, and those last are  by necessary implication, held in subordination to the showers and must yield in every instance to its proper exercise. 
The Constitution of the United States, although adopted by the sovereign States of this Union, and proclaimed in its own language to be the supreme law for this government, can, by no rational interpretation, be brought to conflict with this attribute in the States; there is no express delegation of it by the Constitutional and it would imply an incredible fatuity in the States, to ascribe to them the intention to relinquish the power of self-government and self- preservation. A correct view of this matter must be demonstrate, moreover, that the right of eminent domain in government is no wise interferes 

[Column 3]
and familiar, that it seems somewhat strange. at this day, to raise a doubt or question concerning it."
Mr. Tourgee.- When property is taken from an individual by the State and given to a corporation, the tenure by which property is held is from the State, and the interest of the State is above all private interest. 
Mr. Graham, of Orange.- Property can be taken by the State, when the owner is compensated.
Mr.Tourgee.- Very well. In the Constitution we have the clear power to protect any man from poverty, and keep a sufficient amount of property in his hands to support his family and educate his children. All outside of that must go to pay his just and honest debts. And such a provision in the Constitution of North-Carolina would strike a fearful blow at the landed aristocracy of the State. Two-thirds of the lands of the State are now in the hands of about fifteen hundred persons, and most all of them are greatly indebted. 
Now the ordinance under consideration is entirely powerless to effect relief. The courts of the provisional government are under the control of the military authority. If we are to make discriminations in favor of the debtor, it can only be cone by supplication to Gen. Canby. 
Mr. Rodman- There is a resolution to that effect, appended to this ordinance. 
Mr.Tourgee- I know that. But instead of asking him to administer our ordinance, we had better ask him to exercise his own powers. Besides the distinction against debts since May, 1865, is unjust. General orders now exempt twenty acres of land from sale, whether worth two thousand dollars or twenty five cents. When gentlemen say there is protection now, they forget that this exemption is not a protection to all the people. The Court house door of Guilford is plastered with notices of sales of land, for petty sums, because the debts which they owe do not come under the protection of general orders. Many of these sales are for debts since 1865, and most for debts before the war. Since the war, the people went into business, mainly upon the faith of debts, which are now uncollectible. One gentlemen of his acquaintance had fifteen thousand dollars of this character due him, he went into business since the war, and is now likely to be sold out in less than three weeks. His present debts were contracted since the war, but it is as manifestly a debt of the war as if it had been contracted in 1863, and it is equally unjust to compel its payment. He hoped the Convention would not permit a man to be beggared simply because he went in debt since the war.- No reason why they should bot be as well protected as any others. The abstract character of the contracts is the same. it is a duty to stay both until the homestead close can be inserted in the Constitution. The condition of the people demands protection, but he repeated that this ordinance left them out in the cold. If this Convention refuses passage of a homestead law, it will fail to discharge the highest duty ever devolved on any legislative body. Let us now adopt a substitute praying Gen. Canby to suspend all sales under thirty days after the vote upon the ratification of this Constitution.  Then put a homestead provision in the Constitution , and in his belief all the relief that was necessary would be conferred.
---
Wednesday, Feb. 5th, 1858.
The Convention assembled at 10 o'clock in the Commons Hall, Pres. Cowles in the chair.
Prayer by the Rev. Mr. May, of the Convention.
Mr.Patrick presented a petition for a divorce by some citizen of his County. Referred.
Leave of absence was granted to Mr. Benbow, on account of sickness.
Mr.Jones, of Washington, from the committee of corporations other than municipal reported unfortunately

[Column 4]
such mature deliberation, he did insist upon a vote. 
Mr. Jones, of Caldwell, chairman of the homestead committee, said that the committee would only report a prospective homestead. he states this in order to remove any impression to the contrary. 
Mr. Welker said he hoped the Convention would not postpone. Mr. Rich called for the reading of such returns of the Sheriffs, as had been received. 
The Secretary read a communication from R.M. White, Sheriff of Mecklenburg, stating that there were 620 executions- [[?]] for bills of cost-the money to be collected on the whole amounting to $96.121, of which $47.371 were old debts, and $41,892 new debts, while $3,858 were bills of cost. From J. Mann, Sheriff of Stanly, executions exclusive of fi fas, &c., 42-money to be collected $17,291, and this outside of what deputies have in hand.
Mr. Congleton objected to the postponement.
Mr. May favored the postponement because he did not believe the Convention ready to decide. Because he thought a better plan be present, he hoped the motion would be agreed to.
Mr. Rodman said the Convention might now indicate its preference for some one of the propositions before it. there was no propriety in postponement now.
Mr. Grant of Northampton, again urged a vote on the main question.
Mr. Heaton said he hoped the Convention would not be postpone. There was a well settled sentiment in favor of relief, and though the ordinance of the Convention doubtless had objectionable features, nevertheless, as it was temporary in its character, he would vote for it. Besides, he understood the ordinance to aim at the remedy merely and not at the obligation. He would merely and not at the obligation. He would vote for the ordinance, but should any effort be made to incorporate its principle in the u=fundamental law, he would oppose it to the end.
The motion of Mr. Rich was lost. 
Mr. King, of Lenoir, opposed the ordinance of the committee. The learned gentlemen had admitted it to be a step towards repudiation. The tracks all seem to go the same way. The substitute of the delegate from orange was better, but did not answer the purpose. If the proposition to make a tenth payable annually were adopted, a man would have to pay lawyer's fees double the principle on a $60 debt, besides other fees. This was called relief. Stay laws from 1861 to the present time had destroyed confidence and deprived the people of their just rights. And if this Convention should stop the Sheriffs it ought not to hinder the Courts. It was impossible to tell when confidence would be restored, should this system of impartial legislation continue.
Mr. Abott said he was reluctant to vote for this measure, but had made up his mind to do so. He would support the amendment of Mr. Tourgee and the ordinance of the committee amended. The substitute of Mr. Graham, of Orange, was no read and put to a vote:
FOR- Baker Barnes, Bradley, Ellis, Eppes, Glover, Graham, of Orange, Hare, Hodnett, Hollowell, Holt,Hyman, King of Lenoir,Lennor, Marler, McCubbins, Merrit, Sanderlin,-18.
AGAINST- Abbot, Andres, Aydlott, Blume, Bryan, Carey, Carter, Candler, Cherry, Chillson, Colgrove, Congleton, Cox, Dowd, Duckworth, Etheridge, Fisher, Franklin, French, of Rockingham, Fullings, Gahagan, George, Graham, of Montgomery, Grant, of Wayne, Grant, of Northampton, Gully, Gunter, Harris, of Wake, Harris, of Franklin, Hay, Hayes, of Robeson, Heaton, Highsmith, Hobbs, Hoffler, good, ing, Jones, of Caldwell, Jones, of Washington, King of Lincoln, Laflin, Lee, Legg, Logan, Long, Mann, May, Mayo, McDonald, of Chatham, McDonald, of Moore, Moore, Morton, Mullincan, Murphy, Nance, Newson, Nicholson, Patrick, Parker, Parks, Petree, Peterson,

[Column 5]
Mr. Tourgee said that the amendment did not invalidate liens.  It would not interfere with the jurisdiction of the Courts, but only prevent sales.
Mr. Pool was opposed to stay-laws. He sincerely trusted the Convention  would not pass any stay-law, applying to debts since May, '65. The passage of the amendment would commit the Convention to that policy.
Mr. Fullings said he too was opposed to all stay-laws. There was no protection in them to the honest creditor. What would hinder the debtor from defrauding his creditor? If some clause were put in preventing that, he might vote for the ordinance, but as it stood he would oppose it.
The vote was then called on the amendment of Mr. Tourgee, and stood as follows: 
For-- Messrs. Blume, Bradley, Bryan, Carter. Candler, Chillson, Dickey, Dickey, Franklin, George, Graham, of Montgomery, Gully, Gunter, Harris of Wake, Hay, Hoffler, Lee, Logan, Long, Mann, May, Merritt, McDonald, of Moore, Morton, Murphy, Nance, Newsom, Patrick, Peterson, Ragland, Smith, Tourgee, Turner, Welker, Williams, of Wake.
Against-- Mesers. Aydlott, Baker, Barnes, Cherry, Colgrove Congleton, Cox, Dowd, Ducksworth, Ellis, Eppes. Etheridge, Fisher, Forkner, French, of Bladen, French, of Rockingham, Fallings, Gahagan, Galloway, Glover, Grant, of Wayne, Grant, of Northampton, Harris, of Franklin. Hayes, of Robeson, Hayes, of Halifax, Heaton, Hobbs, Hodnett, Hollowell, Hood, Hyman, Ing, Jones, of Caldwell, Jones, of Washington, King, of Lincoln King, of Lenoir, Kinney, Laflin. Lee, Logan, Mayo, Marler, McCubins, Mullican, Nicholson, Parker, Parks, Petree, Pierson, Pool, Ray, Read, Reufrow, Rhodes. Rodman, Rose, Sanderlin, Stilwell, Sweet, Teague, Trogden, Tucker, Watts, Williams, of Sampsom, Williamson-- Yeas 27.  Nays 69.
Mr. King, of Lincoln, said the same clamor for relief which was now made, if gratified, would lead to repudiation. He hoped the honest men of the Convention would vote the ordinance, &c., down. 
Mr. Heaton favored a call of the house before the vote was taken, which was seconded by Mr. Harris, of Wake.
The roll was called and stood as follows;
Present-- Messrs. Abbott, Andrews, Aydlott, Baker, Barnes, Bradley, Bryan, Carey, Carter, Candler. Cherry, Chillson, Colgrove, Cangleton, Cox, Dickey, Dowd, Ducksworth, Ellis. Eppes, Etheridge, Fisher, Forkner, Franklin, French, of Bladen, French, of Rockingham, Fullings, Gahagan, Galloway, George, Glover, Graham, of Montgomery, Grant, of Northampton, Gully.Gunter, Harris, of Wake, Harris, of Franklin, Hay, Hayes, of Robeson, Hayes, of Halifax, Heaton, Highsmith, Hobbs, Hodnett. Hoffler, Hollowell, Hood, Hyman, Ing, Jones, of Washington, King, of Lincoln, King, of Lenoir, Kinney, Lafflin, Lee, Legg,Lennon, Logan, Mann, Mayo, Marler, McCubbins, Merritt, McDonald, of Chatham, Moore, Morton, Mullican., Murphy, Nance, Newson, Nicholson, Patrick, Parker, Parks, Petree, Peterson, Pierson, Pool, Ragland. Ray, Read, Renfrow,Rhodes, Rich, Rodman, Rose, Sanderlin, Smith, Stilwell, Sweet, Taylor, Teague, Tourgee, Trogden. Tucker, Turner, of Watts, Welker, Williams, of Sampson, Williams, of Wake, and Williamson.
Absent.-- Messrs, Ashley, Benbow.Blume, Durham. Garland, Graham of Orange, Hare, Holt, Long and Stilley.
Mr. Bradley said he was opposed to the whole matter, it was a farce and a humbug. Mr. Candler said he was opposed to legislation.
Mr. Ellis said he understood the whole matter to be unconstitutional-- the Convention had no right to deal with it.
Mr. Harris of Wake said he was in favor of relief, but understood this ordinance and amendment to be untinctured of repudiation. 
Mr. Hood said that under instructions he would vote against anything

[Column 6]
Mayo, Marler, McCubbins, Merritt, McDonald, of Chatham, McDonald of Moore, Moore, Morton, Mullican, Nance, Newson, Patrick, Pierson, Ragland, Read, Rich, Rodman, Smith, Stilwell, Sweet, Taylor, Tucker, Turner, Watts, Williams, of Sampson, Williamson.
Against.-- Messrs. Andrews, Baker, Candler,Cherry, Congleton, Dowd, Duckworth, Ellis, Eppes, French, of Rockingham, Fullings, Gahagan, Glover, Grant, of Northampton, Hayes, of Robeson, Hayes, of Halifax, Hoffler, Hollowell, Hood, Hyman, Ing, Jones, of Washinton, King. of Lenoir, Lee, Logan, May, Murphy, Nicholson, Parker, Parks, Peterson, Pool, Ray, Renfrow, Rhodes, Rose, Teague, Trogden, Welker, Williams of wake,
Ayes 57.  Nays 39.
Mr. Tourgee asked to be excused from voting.
Mr. Cox, also.
Mr. Forker said he was opposed to the principle of this ordinance, but the Convention seemed disposed to grant relief, and request the General to enforce the ordinance-- lie, therefore, vote yea. 
Mr. Harris, of Wake-- not up to his idea of relief, but he voted yea.
Mr. McDonald, of Chatham, the same.
Mr. Heaton said the measure was temporary-- he voted yea, but would oppose the incorporation of any such provision as indicated in the Constitution.
Mr. Parker said there was no provision for the protection of the creditor-- he voted no. 
Mr. Welker said the operation of the bill was unjust.
Mr. Abbott announced that if delegates presented their checks at the First National Bank, they would be cashed.
Mr. Latlin said he had been requested to ask the use of this hall for the Conservative Convention this evening. He hoped no one would object. If so they might remember the Scriptural passage: "Blessed are ye, when men persecute and revile you, and say all manner of evil against you."
 On motion of Mr. Turner the request was granted.
Mr. Heaton called up the first article of the Constitution, on the Executive department, when
The first section was read as reported from the committee of the whole. 
Mr. Heaton moved to strike out "two" and make the term of Governor and other officers three years.
Mr. Watts said he had favored four years years in committee, but thought it better now adhere to the report.
Mr. Jones, of Washington, began to speak on the question, but yielded to a motion to adjourn, retaining the floor when again considered. 
The Convention then adjourned.

From Washington.
Washington, Feb. 5th.-- The President and Mr. Stanton have had neither written or personal conversation since the 12th August last.
 The President's letter to Gen. Grant, of January 31st, contains this paragraph: "You had found in our first conference that the President was desirous of keeping Mr. Stanton cut of office, whether sustained in his suspension or not. You know what induced the President to ask from you a promise. You also knew that in case your views of duty did not accord with his own convictions, it was his purpose to fill your place by another appointment. Even ignoring the existence of a positive understanding between us, these conclusions were plainly deducible from these our various conversations. It is certain, however, that even under these circumstances you did not offer to return the place to my possession but according to your own statements placed yourself in a position when, could I have anticipated your action, I would have been compelled to ask of your predecessor in the War Department, a letter of resignation, or else to resort to the more

[Column 7]
The Convention Wednesday passed the following Ordinance, the result of much patient deliberation by that body. It is the ordinance on the subject heretofore reported by Mr. Rodman.
An Ordinance Respecting the Jurisdiction of the Courts of this State.
Section 1. Be it ordained by the people of North-Carolina in Convention assembled, That no court of law or equity of this State shall have jurisdiction of any suit or action founded on any contract made prior to the first day of May, 1865, (except actions against public officers, executors, administrators, guardians, trustees, and others acting in a fiduciary capacity, and their sureties for breach of their respective duties, by the appropriation to their own use of money or property officially received by them or other fraudulent net,) or any action or process to revive or enforce any judgement heretofore recovered on any contract, whether such action be now pending, or shall be commenced hereafter, and whether such process has been already issued or shall hereafter be sued for ; and the sheriffs, coroners, and constables of this State, having in their hands any final process issued upon any such cause of action, are hereby commanded to stay all proceeding upon the same, and return the same to the proper courts. 
Sec. 2. This ordinance shall be in force from and after its ratification by this Convention, and shall continue in force until the first day of July, 1868, or until the Constitution, which this Convention has met to adopt, shall go into effect, whichever shall first happen.
Resolved, That a copy of the foregoing ordinance be sent to Maj. Gen. Canby, Commanding, &c., and that he be respectfully requested to cause the same to be enforced.

NOTICES.
Notice--- Wayne County.
The Republicans of Wayne County are requested to meet at Goldsboro' on Saturday, February 8th, for the purpose of electing delegates to the Republican State Nominating Convention, to be held in the city of Raleigh, on the 26th day of February, 1868. 
By order of the
COUNTY EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE.
Notice-- Fourth Congressional District.
Notice is hereby given that a Convention of the Republicans of the 4th District will be held at Raleigh, on Wednesday the 26th of February, to nominate a candidate for Congress.
W. W. HOLDEN
EUGENE GRISSOM. } Committee.
JAMES H. HARRIS.
Notice-- Sixth Congressional District.
The Republican Nominating Convention, for Congress, will meet at Salisbury on the 3d day of March next.
W. R. MYERS,
C. J. COWLES } Committee
W. J. WILLIAMS.
Republican Meeting in Wake County.
A meeting of the Republicans of Wake County will be held in the Court House, in Raleigh, on Saturday, the 22d of February, to appoint delegates to the Republican State Convention and the Congressional District Convention, to be held in Raleigh on the 26th.  A full attendance is requested.
JOS. W. HOLDEN,
T. L. BANKS,
MOSES PATTERSON,
Committee.
February 4, 1868. 84-td.
FINANCIAL. 
RALEIGH NATIONAL BANK
OF 
NORTH-CAROLINA

Transcription Notes:
DO NOT PRESS DONE IF NOT COMPLETE. NOT COMPLETE. through 4th column completed The page cuts off, so tried to figure out the words but could not make out all.