Newspaper Page Text
COLUMBIA, S. C.
Taeaday MomiuR, August 3, 1869.
--? -? ? ? - -- r^TT--:-7 '
The Canard ship Russia, has just made
the quickest trip on record across the
Atlantic. She sailed from New York, on
the 7th instant, and reached Liverpool'
in eight days, four hours? and forty-five
minutes. In this trip she beat the Scotia,
-which had made the fastest time on re?
cord, either way, by two hours and a
half, that vessel having made the ran in
eight days, seven hours, and fifteen
DEATH OF ISAAC To cc EV.-Tho death
of Hon, Isaac Toucey, of Connecticut,
is announced. He was one of the war
horses of New England Democracy.
With Tom Seymour and Frank Pierce
he fought radicalism from its inception,
and, though he lost many battles, he
never lost his faith or his courage. His
career was long and distinguished, be?
ginning almost with the beginning of
the republic and before the formation of
the old Whig and Democratic parties.
He was born in Newtown, Conn., No?
vember 5, 1790; received a thorough
classical education; was a Representative
in Congress from Connecticut; Governor
of the State; Attorney-General of the
United States} Senator in Congress, and
Secretary bf the Navy.
The spaco given in Northern papers
to the discussion of the Chinese immi?
gration project, not only shows that its
importance is duly estimated, but also
that it cannot escape being made one of
political strife and dissension. Tho
radical journals have already raised a
howl of indignation, and point triumph?
antly to the law passed by Congress
against the coolie trade, while the D??
mocratie papers, almost with one voice,
favor the project An examination of
the Congressional law referred to, and
upon which the radicals, at the first
blush, rely to defeat the movement, will
be found, upon closer examination, en?
tirely inapplicable. It was passed with
direct reference to enforced servitude in
this conntry, bat can have no bearing
upon any contracts entered into by the
mutual consent of capitalists and labor?
ers. In fact, a special clause is engrafted
upon the Act itself, by which il is ren?
dered inoperative in case the emigrants
manifested their consent to-extradition
before the American Consul of the port
from whenoe they sail. We must not bo
surprised if the next Congress seeks to
pass some stringent laws against a mea?
sure so entirely inimical to the party in
power and to the section controlling the
destinies of the nation; but the subject
is one HO delicate to handle, in the face
of the long avowed and acknowledged
policy of encouraging immigration, that
we may well doubt their ultimate suc?
cess. It is now evident that no extended
scheme of Chinese immigration can be
carried out other other than in tho face
of a bitter opposition and a decisive
battle on tho floors of Congress between
the two opposing parties. This should
bo properly understood and propared
for by our people, since on its issue
hangs all our hopes for social, coninier
ciurnnd political redemption.
A FRESHET IN THE MISSISSIPPI.-Tho
Mississippi River, on account of tho
heavy rain fall, it is reported, is higher
now that it hus been at any timo this
season, und is within two und u half foot
of tho high water mark of 1861. Tho
low hinds opposite Quincy, Illinois, ure
iuundutod, several houses having been
floated from their foundations and car?
ried down the stream. The water covers
the Hanuibal und St. Joe liailrond truck,
?iud trains have experienced great dilli
culty in running.
A CHILD FALLS OFF OF A PIAZZA AND
LS KILLED.-On Saturday afternoon last,
a little child of Mr. Kennedy, (conductor
on the South Carolina Railroad,) about
eight years of age, fell from the piazza
of tho second story to the ground, re?
ceiving injuries which occasioned death
a short time after.-Charleston Neics.
It is said that the cholera which broke
out in Teheruu, Persiu, in July last, is
milking its way Westward. Tho number
of deaths rose to thirty daily. During
its prevalence in Europe and America in
1832 and 1849, September und early Oc?
tober are reported to have been its worst
Tho Southern Express Company was
robbed of $4,900, on the lino between
Augusta and Savannah, IL few days ago.
While messenger Mayes \, ns nleep, tin
thieves abstracted the greenbacks.
A white man named John Wheeler,
engineer of the steamer Islander, and i
colored man, whoso namo is unknown,
have mysteriously disappeared from Sa
van uah. Foul play is suspected.
Trivutc Johnson, while tinder tho in?
fluence of liquor, shot and mortally
wounded Sergeaut Skinner, in Casth
.Pinckney, Charleston harbor, on Satur?
day lost. Johnson has been urrestod.
Two lads, named Cain, were buntine
squirrels near Mount Carmel, Abbevilh
County, recently, when the gun of tin
older accidentally went off, killing tlx
younger almost instantly.
Father Qavizzi, in a letter to a fricnt
iu the North of England, says, "thut t
crisis in Italy is approaching, and "thu
he is preparing for a groat crusade."
We hare been furnished with the an?
nexed extraot from a decision of Judge
Orr n?on th?>ome>tead law, which will
be of special interest the legal frater?
QOONKK GQfHTT^fTjtT TXBM, 1869.
In the Common Pteas-Equity Side.
Joseph R. Sholor vs. John Mason, Sr.,
and John Mason, Jr.-Bill to Foreclose
# ? * # ? *
The report of the special referees sub?
mits for the consideration of the Court
whether the defendant and his family
now residing on the mortgage premises
are entitled tc claim and reserve a home?
stead in the same. They submit the evi?
dence taken on reference, bot make no
recommendation to the Court whether
or not a homestead should be allowed.
Is the defendant Mason and his family
entited to hare set off and assigned to
them a family homestead of the value of
$1,000 within the mortgaged premises,
pursuant to the provisions of the Act of
Assembly of 9th September, 1869, enti?
tled "An Aot to determine and perpetu?
ate the Homestead?"
The single bill and mortgage wero exe?
cuted on the 25th day of August, 1866.
The constitution of 1868 was ratified by
the legal voters of *'je State on the 14th,
15th and 16th of April of tba! year, and
was rvcoepted by Congress without alter?
ation or amendment the July following.
The 82d Section of Article II provides
that "tho family homestead of the head
of each family residing ia this State, such
hoc itead consisting of dwelling house,
ont-ouildings and lands to the value of
$1,000," Ac, "shall be exempt from at?
tachment, levy or sale or any inesne or
final process, issued from any Court,"
&j. No exception is made in favor of
any lien, debt or execution existing at
the date of its adoption.
In all cases where land was to be sold
by any process from any Court, after this
section was ratified by the people and
accepted by Congress, the head of the
family became entitled to a homestead.
The Act of Assembly to carry into effect
this section, entitled "Au Act to deter?
mine and perpetuate the Homestead,"
leaves no ground for construction on
this question. The first section provides
that "whenever the real estate of uny
head of a family residing in this State
shall be lovied on by virtue of any inesne
or final process, issued from any Court
upon any judgment, obtained upon any
right of notion, whether arriving pre?
vious or subsequent to tho ratification of
the Constitution of the State of South
Carolina, if the same be tho '<\mily
homestead of such person, the Sheriff or
other officer executing said process shall
cause a homestead such as said person
may select not to exceed the value of
Si,000," &c, "but the residue of tho
lands and tenements of the head of the
family, if nny more or other be shall
have, shall be liable to attachment, levy
Tho General Assembly has further ma?
nifested its solemn and deliberate deter?
mination to have the constitution and
the statute already referred to enforoed
in all cases therein provided for, in ac
Act entitled "An Act to punish Sheriffs
and other officers for violating the home?
stead," approved 15th January, 1869.
The first section provides that no Sheriff
or other officer shall enforce execution in
any other manner than is prescribed in
sections 1 and 2 of the Homestead Act.
The second section provides that if any
person shall sell any real estate without
complying with section 1 of the Home?
stead Act, he shall, for the first offence,
be deemed guilty of malfeasance in of?
fice, and on conviction shall be fined not
less than $500 and not moro than 81,000;
and for the second offence shall be dis?
missed from office.
Tho constitution and these Acts pre?
scribe so clearly the duty of public of?
ficers in making sales under process from
uny Court, it would seem to bo hardly
necessary in a decree to direct, tho oflicei
ordered to sell to set off and assigu n
homestead to the head of a family, as a
failure to do so would be at bia peril,
without an order.
But as the question is raised in thc
pleadings, in the report of the special
referees in this case and ia tho argument
of counsel as to defendant's right tJ
have the family homestead set off and
assigned, I will state my views on tin
It is objected to tho Constitution ol
the Stat o and the Acts of Assembly secur?
ing a homestead as to antecedent debts,
lions und judgments, that they are a vio
lat ion of that clause in the Constitutior
of tho United States which prohibits a 113
State from passing "any law impairing
the obligation of contracts."
Is not the objection met by numerous
authorities in the Courts of sister States,
and by eminent legal writers, recognizing
the right of State Legislatures to pas:
laws exempting property of a debtor fron
levy or salo even for antecedent debts
and is not tho principle rocognized in va
rions decisions of tho Supreme Court o
the United States?
In Morse rs. Gould, 1 Kornau (X. Y.
281, Judge Denio, delivering tho opi
uion of the Appeal Court, said: "I re
gard the Act of 1812 (extending tho ex
emption law of that State to a team um
additional household effects) ns a provi
sion clearly within tho competency o
tho Legislature, and one which the;
might lawfully apply to all futuro pro*
ceedings in Courts, whether such pro
ceedings shall relate t? existing or futur
causes of action." In this ouse jndg
meut and execution bad beon obtaiuc<
in an inferior Court before the exemptioi
law was passed, and tho Court he! tba
the exemption was valid oven as agains
I such judgment. Tho abstract of Judg
Demo's opinion is: " "First. Tho Act ex
I empting certain property from levy o
salo on execution (N. Y. Statutes, 1842
193) applies to judgments and execution
on debts contracted beforo, os well a
after, its passage. Second. This Ac
morely modifies the remedy for enforcini
contracts, and neither destroys it no
substantially impairs its efficiency.
Thoreforo, it dos? not conflict with the
f-.ovisiouB of the Constitution of the
/uitod Stetes forbidding any State to.
palp e hm impairing the obligations of
contracte, aid is Talia.
In Bigelow 9?. Pritchard, Judge Put?
nam, delivering tho opinion of the Su?
preme Court of Massachusetts, said
"that the Legislature might lawfully dir
m i nish the creditor's remed y to enforce
payment by exempting a pari of the pro?
perty of the debtor from attachment or
mesne process, or levy or execution."
In Rockwell vs. Hubboll, 2 Douglass
197, in the Supreme Court of Miohigan,
it ia held "that property may be ex?
empted from ex?cution for debts con?
tracted before the lew of exemption was
The Supreme Court of Georgia, in a
recent case, has decided that the ex?
emption of a homestead of tho value of
$2,DOO, authorized by tho constitution
of that State, from levy or sale even for
antecedent debts, lions and judgments,
is valid, and does not impair the obliga?
tion of contracts. The same point has
been ruled, or the same principle in?
volved has been decided, in other States
of the Union.
In 3 Parsons on Contracts, 552, tho
learned author, after reviewing many of
tho cases decided in different States,
says: "At tho same time, however, it is
admitted that a State may viako partial
exemptions of property, as of furniture,
food, apparel, or even a homestead."
Again, on the same page, ho says: "It
is to be observed that as to the remedy,
there can be no difference between a debt
existing before and ono contracted after
the law is made."
In the Planter's Bank vs. Sharp, G
Howard, 301-830, Jndge Woodbury, in
delivering the opinion of tho Supreme
Court of the United States, admits that
"laws may be passed by the State Legis?
latures exempting tools or household
goods from levy or salo under existing
If the principle is once conceded that
property of small valuo can be exempted
from levy for contracts existing before
the passage of the law, how can such an
enactment be said to be unconstitutional
when the Taine of the property exempted
is enlarged ?
The exemption of household effects,
of small value, under what was popularly
designated tho "cow and bed law" of
this State, more effectually hindered and
defeated the creditor, in many cases,
than a homestead exemption of Si,OOO
would do in others.
The principle upon which the consti?
tutionality of the homestead law is main?
tained has been admitted by the Su?
preme Court of tho United States, in
cases where tho State Legislatures have
passed laws changing tue statute of limi?
tations; discharging insolvent debtors;
and abolishing imprisonment for debt.
It is said, however, that such legislation
effects only the "remedy" of the creditor,
but does not impair the obligation of
Will not an examination of tho result
of such enactments show that the ex?
emption of a part of the debtor's goods
and lands hinders, delays and defeats the
creditor in many cases in a less degree
than tho enactments referred to, whidh
have been ruled constitutional by the
Supreme Court of the United States ?
The debtor contracts a debt; his pro?
mise is to pay the money; the creditor
is entitled to demand and receive it when
due. He has his remedy, as the law
exists at the dato of the contract, ugainst
the property of the debtor then held,
and all his subsequent earnings, until
the whole debt is paid. He may hold
but little property when the credit is
given, but being a skilled nrtisan or me?
chanic, the creditor relies more upon his
future earnings for payment than upon
tho property thea held. Suit is insti?
tuted and judgment rocovored. In tho
meantime, the Legislature enacts un in?
solvent law, which authorizes the debtor
to surrender his effects, which may be
only nominal in value, to the creditors,
and be forever discharged from all lia?
bility ever to pay another cent to the
creditor, all his future earnings being
protected from liability for tho unsatis
I tied portion of the dobt. Is the original
contract impaired, or tho crelitor hin?
dered, defeated or delayed by tho enact?
ment? The Supreme Court says no.
So, too, of the statute of limitations;
when the debt is contracted the statutory
term ia a given number of years; the
Legislature reduces it, and if it possesses
the constitutional power to reduce it
from six to three yours, why not less
than three, and if less, how much less
can they declare it? Tho creditor, by
accident or ignorance, fails to sue under
the amended statute, and on the theory
that the Legislature has only modified
the "remedy," he loses the debt, is the
original contract impaired, or the creditor
delayed or defeated by this subsequent
legislation? The Supremo Court says no.
So, too, of imprisonment for dobt.
Tho debtor has no visiblo property upon
which an execution may bo lovied. His
effects consist of money and choses in
action. Ho obtains credit; tho croditor
knowing that under existing laws ho can
enforce payment by his execution of
capias ad satis/aciendum; tho creditor
obtains his judgment, and issues his ca.
sa.; the debtor is arrested, and before
ho makes his assignment, tho Legisla
j ture abolishes imprisonment for debt;
tho prison doors aro opened, tho debtor
departs, and tho creditor having no com?
pulsory process against tho body, where?
by an assignment of tho choses in action
or payment of the money can bo en?
forced, loses his entire debt; and the
legislativo Act producing tho result, and
affecting only tho remedy, is constitu?
tional! Is tho original contract impaired,
or the creditor hindered, dolaycd or en?
tirely defeated, by thii subsequent legis?
lation? The Supreme Court says no.
Is the enactment of a homestead law,
which is sanctioned by a generous hu?
manity for tho wives and children of un?
fortunate or improvident husbands and
fathers, any more obnoxious to tho con
.ti tattoos! objection, that it i na pairs the
"obligation of contracts" when applied
to existing contracts and liens, than the
legislation commented ou above and
sanctioned bj the Supreme Court of the
U?Hed States? F
In the ease under consideration, the
remedy is changed by tho, Act to secare
a homestead. Tile defendant is entitled
to a homestead daring1 his life, if he con?
tinues in possession of it. Under the
former law, the complainant, on Sling
his bill to foreclose Lis mortgage, and
making proof of his demand, was enti?
tled to an order to sell the mortgaged
premises, or a sufficient portion of them
to satisfy his debt, and the defendant's
equity of redemption was forever barred.
Tho State, believing that it was an emi?
nently wise policy to secure a homestead
to each head of a family, and prevent
the immigration of her citizens conse?
quent upon the general and indiscrimi?
nate sale of their homes, postpones the
remedy of foreclosure as to that part of
the tract wbioh may bo assigned, during
the life or ocoupauoy of tho defendant.
He can forthwith proceed to sell that
part of the tract not assigned, and when
the contingency provided for in tho Act
arrives, terminating the rights of tho
defendant, he can sell the balance
Could not tho Legislature, in organiz?
ing tho judicial system of tho State, have
provided that no judge .should havo ju?
risdiction of an application to foreclose
a mortgage for one year? And if for
one year, why not for ten or twenty
years? If for one or twenty years, would
it not havo been equally competeut to
have mado tho prohibition continue
during tho life or occupancy of each
mortgagor in the State? It might have
been very unjust or oapricions to huve
made such an enactment, but who can
deny their authority to have done so?
In Sturgis vs. Crowuinshield, 4 Wheat,
200, Chief Justice Mut shall says: "The
distinction between the obligation of a
contract und the remedy given by tho
Legislature to enforce that obligation,
has been taken at tho bar, and exists in
the nature of things. Without impair?
ing the obligation of the contract, the
remedy may certainly be modified, ns
the wisdom of the nation shall direct."
There is nothing unjust or immoral in
conceding this power to the Legislature.
"All contracts are made with a full know?
ledge of the parties that tho law-making
power may modify the remedy."
The foregoing views are presented npon
the assumption that tho Constitution of
the United States was operative, and the
supreme law of Sonth Carolina, from the
surrender of the Confederate armies in
April, '65, to July, '68, when the present
constitution was accepted by Congress,
and the State admitted to representation.
But is such assumption true, in law (I
mean the legislation of Congress) or in
fact? Take the reconstrnction Acts of
Congress, and upon examination, what
feature do they present compatible with
the theory that the constitution was of
force or that its guarantees of the rights
of the States was recognized by Con?
gress? The legislation was even more
absolute than any previously applied to
the territories when organized, or tc
their enabling acts when about to apply
for admission into the Union, lt dun icc
the State representation in both brauchet
of Congress-each State is entitled by th?
constitution to representation; and in thc
Senate, no State can be deprived of itt
equal representation without its consent
It denied the right of the State to pass
and ignored all laws existing, fixing thc
qualifications of voters. It prescribed i
class of voters, constituting a large ma
jority, who should exercise the privilege
who had never before been recognized a;
citizens. It denied the right of suffrage
to a large class of the most intelligen
citizens and excluded them from holding
office under tho new government. I
ignored tho constitution and all laws ol
the State prescribing the timo, place ant
manner of holding elections. It estab
lished the military power superior to th
civil, and mada tho latter entirely subor
dinato to tho former. The de facto go
ver nm cut then existing was declared ti
be only provisional. Tho military wa
invested with nearly unlimited power
and not unfrequently exercised it with
out stint in superceding and annullinj
existing laws in the State, and in
military order ordaining and onforciuj
uew laws. It removed State officers
with and without lawful cause, and np
pointed their successors. Tho Governor
of Georgia and Mississippi were removei
early in 1867, and the Governors o
North Carolina and this State in IStVS
und successors appointed. Judges wer
removed because they refused to carr
out military orders in their Courts. Th
citizen was not only liable to be arrested
tried, convicted and punished by milita
ry tribunals for violation of civil lu\
alone, but this extraordinary power wo
put into force against many of the citi
zens, who, if the Constitution of th
Uuited States had been of force withi:
the limits of South Caroliua, could hav
appealed to the civil tribunals-to th
writ of habeas corpus-to tho jndgmeu
of their peers, to relievo them from th
clutches of the military.
Tho war was onded in Muy, ISC'}-th
last Confederate soldier had laid dow;
his arms. If tho Constitution of th?
Uuited States was of force in this State
to protect tho rights of tho citizen an<
State, until July, 18GS, why was it tba
the military power during theso thre
long years was not only not snbordiuat
to, but actually superior to, tho civil av
thority? Is it not manifest, from tili
review of tho legislation of Congress an
tho action of tho military authorities
that tho government under which w
lived was military; all civil functions i
every department tolerated and recoi
nixed no longer tuan they were cousis
out with the wishes and opinions of th
If this bo true, then tho coustitutio
adopted in this State could not conflit
with any clause of tho Constitution <
tho United States, because it wa3 not <
force at tho time, to restrain tho Convei
tion or protect the people.
But after it? ratification by the people,
it WM to have no fore? or effect until
Congress accepted it It was presented,
and Congress did accept it uncondition?
ally. If the clause scouring a homestead,
or the .clause prohibiting the collection
of debts, the consideration of which was
th? purchase money of a slave, bad been
obnoxious to tho charge that they im?
paired the obligation of contracts, they
would have been stricken out by Con?
gress, or the .Legislature required by
solomo Act, and as a condition precedent
to admission, to repeal the clauses, AB
they did in the case of Georgia. The
Constitution of Georgia, when presented
for acceptance, contained two paragraphs
practically repudiating all debts. These
clauses Congress required Georgia to re?
nounce, which was done by her Legisla
toro, but no exception was taken to tho
homestead sootion in the same instru?
ment, though its value was fixed at
$2,000-double that provided in this
As already stated, the Constitution of
tho United States was not recognized as
of force in this State. Even the rights
and immunities uniformly accorded to
tho organized Territories of the United
States, and to persons residing without
the States and Territories in the Indian
country, were repudiated by the acts of
Congress and practico of the military.
Protection of person and property, of
the right of trial by jury-of being con?
fronted by witnesses-of presentment by
a grand jury before being held to answer
a criminal charge-of making our own
laws-of imposing our own taxes-of
representation in a State or National
Legislature-of choosing our own officers
-of executing our own laws-of making
contracts with our laborers, uud of en?
forcing such contracts by any known law
-of appealing to the writ of habeas
corpus-all were denied to us a:; lights,
and such ns were enjoyed were permis?
Whut single feature in any paragraph
in the Constitution of the United States
spread its protection tcgis over the terri?
tory or inhabitants of South Carolina ?
Cnn it be gravely urged, in the face of
thia review of the condition of affairs
from May, 1805, to July, 1866, that such
clauses of the Constitution ns restrained
the powers of State and citizens were of
force and those giving them protection
were not of force ? Can it be seriously
insisted that the clause prohibiting any
State from passing a law impairing the
obligation of contracts was operative to
restrain the Convention that formed tho
new Constitution, when none of the per?
sonal or political rights, privileges and
immunities of its members, or of their
constituents, were recognized or enforced
by and through the remaining sections
of the same instrument ? Surely not.
Tho Constitution in this Territory was
dormant, sleeping, in abeyance. The
government was military. Tho recon?
struction Acts of Congress and the will
of tho military commandant was the only
constitution of force-the supreme law
of the land. It was as absolute as though
we had been a conquered province,
wrested from a neighboring nation.
If the Constitution of the United
States was not of force when the Consti?
tution of the State was framed and rati?
fied, and did not become operative until
accepted by Congress, then there was no
constitutional restraint on the conven?
tion, and none of the provisions of the
State Constitution can be held to bo vio?
lative of any olause in the Constitution
of the United States.
The Supreme Court of the United
States held, at an early day, that State
laws passed prior to 1798-the date of
the adoption of tho Constitution-im?
pairing the obligation of contracts, were
valid, as tho Constitution did not, pre?
vious to that time, exercise any limita?
tions upon the legislation of tho States.
After the admission of Texas into the
Union, tho same decision wus made by
thc samo Court, affirming tho validity
of a law passed by tho Legislature of
that State prior to annexation, which, if
passed subsequently, would have "im?
paired the obligation of contracts."
Thc Convention of this State might
have declined, however unjustly, to re?
cognize any debt, judgment or lien that
' existed by virtue of the laws of tho pre?
ceding governments of tho ?tate, and
what remedy could have been found for
the omission or refusal? If they had the
power to refuse altogether, could they
not, when recognizing debts, liens and
judgments, annex conditions to such re?
No more has been dono here. It is
said in effect to tho complainant, your
mortgage is recognized, but subject to
tho condition that tho defendant shall
enjoy a homestead, conformably to the
constitution, and the Act of the Legisla?
ture perpetuating and defining it.
I, therofore, adjudgo that tho Consti?
tution and laws of this State, securing a
homestead to each head of a family,
whether the debt or lieu existed at tho
dato of tho adoption of the Constitution
or has been subsequently created, is no
violation of the Constitution of the
If I had grave doubts on the question,
I should feel it my duty to solve thom by
pronouncing the Constitution and laws
of tho State no violation of the Consti?
tution of tho United States. When the
Circuit and Supremo Court Judges of a
Stato decido a State law unconstitutional,
no appeal lies to tho Supremo Court of
thc United States, and tho citizen is
thereby denied tho privilege of vindi?
cating tho constitutionality of the State
enactment before that august tribunal.
(Signed) JAMES L. ORB.
JULY 21, 1869.
A mun committed suicide in England,
a day or two ago, by throwing himself
auder a railroad train. On his person
was found a number of tho securities
robbed from the New York Ocean Bank
some time ago.
Tho tea-making colony of Japanese,
in El Dorado County, California, is get?
ting along finely.
A few ?op?esof the 'Sack and Desirae -
?ion of Colombia' can be obtained at the
Phoenix offloe. Price twenty-five cents.
UNITS? STATES COURT.-Hou. George
S. Bryan authorizes us to state that the
United States Court will sit in Green?
ville, on Monday, the 9th instant, in?
stead of tho 2d, as heretofore announced.
MERCANTILE PRINTING.-All kinds of
mercantile printing, such as circulars,
letter heads, cards, bill heads, state?
ments, Sic, for counting-rooms and
offices, promptly nttented to at the Phoe?
nix job office.
BRIDGE OVER WATEREE RrvER FINISH?
ED.-The bridge over Wateree River, on
the W. and M. R. R., about four miles
from Kingsville, was finished last Friday
and a passenger train crossed it for the
first time. Major LasSalle, of this city,
was the constructor.
The house-breakers continuo their
operations successfully about Columbia.
On Saturday and Sunday nights, the
dwellings of two or three of our citizens
were entered and thoroughly overhauled,
but nothing of value carried off-money,
apparently, being the only object.
CRUMBS.-Two plucky gentlemen of
this city were aonidently left by the rail
cars at Chester, on Sunday; but nothing
daunted, they hired a buggy and drove
The new teu and fifteen scrip has
made its appearance in this city. It is
au improvement-in paper, at least-on
the old issue. Mr. Gambril has speci?
mens of the issue.
Columbians who have absented them?
selves from home, in search of a cooler
place, can safely return.
OUR BOOK TABLE.-Messrs. Bryan and
McCnrter have kindly laid upon our
table a copy of "Cord and Creese," by
the author of the "Dodge Club." "Cord
and Creese" is a sensational story, which,
in our opinion, may be spoken of favora?
bly. Viewed as a novel, it is slovenly in
plot, improbable and marvellous in de?
tail, and inartistic and imperfect in
workmanship. On the other hand, it
contains chapters arousing the most in?
tense excitement and interest. "Cord
and Creeso" is a history of vengeance,
located alike in England and India, of
wonderful arrangement of circumstantial
evidence, put together at one time in the
lamest manner, and at another with
singular skill and adroitness. It con?
tains some strong dramatic points, in
spite of the exaggeration of fiction.
"Cord and Creese" is well worth the pe?
rusal, though scarcely the clever book
which might be expected from the racy
pen of the author of the "Dodge Clnb."
HOTEL ARRIVALS-August 1-Columbia
Hotel-TV. T. Blako, W. T. Jones, N. A.
Heywood, C. Barnum, city; T. L. Mur?
ray, E. M. Grimkie, H. V. L. Spriggs,
W. A. Bradley, Charleston; T. E.
Thames. B. T. Aliud, Augusta; T. N.
Gadsden, Littleton; W. H. Jeffers, P. G.
Chappell, Richland; A. A. Winn, Savan?
nah, Ga.; J. P. Adams, S. C.; W. J.
Boyd, Baltimore; T. Zimmerman, St.
Matthews; Alex. McBeo, Greenville.
National Hotel-E. W. Blance, Flo?
rence; J. A. McSweon, Darlington; A. B.
Joyner, Gadsden; T. H. Belonger, Edge
field; Mrs. D. M. Lawton, Albany, Ga.;
J. O. B. Dargan, Darlington; John J.
Bran the, Jr., Mercer University; Madam
Moore, Macon, Ga.; J. T. Howard, Ora?
ngeville; Peter Critz, Augusta, Ga.;
Thomas Richardson, Sumter; Capt. L.
H. Bloget, Camden; Nat. Bynum, Rich?
land; Gen. J. B. Kershaw, Camden; F.
A. Connor, Cokesbury; W. A. Brun9on,
Darlington; J. A. Crews, Greenville.
Nickerson House.-J. Norton, Chester;
Mr. and Mrs. Wm. J. Hume, Charleston;
James O. Meredith, Greenville; Julius
T. Coit, Charlotte, N. C.; E. Thomas,
Frog Lovel; Thos. Stovall Davant, C., C.
& A. R. H.; J. G. Hall, Havana; J. A.
Gay, Salisbury, N. C.; Rev. Wm. D.
Thomas, Greenville; Hon. Jam s L. Orr,
Anderson; C. Clacius and wife, Charles?
I NEW ADVERTISEMENTS.-Attention is
I called to the following advertisements,
published tho first time this morning:
S. B. Thompson-Adm'r Notice.
Mrs. A. H. Chapman-Notice.
T. J. LaMotte-School Notice.
Meeting True Brotherhood Lodge.
Meeting Palmetto Fire Engine Co.
University of South Carolina.
NIL DESPERANDUM, HOPE!-Hundreds
of cases of Scrofula, in its worst stager,
old cases of Syphilis that have defied
tho skill of eminent Physicians, Rheu?
matics who have been sufferers for years,
and the victims of tho injudicious use of
Mercury, have been radically cured by
DR. TUTT'S SARSAPARILLA AND QUEEN'S
DELIGHT. It is tho most powerful alter?
ative aud blood purifier known. It is prc.
scribed by very many Physicians. J31 G
Mr. A. H. Leo, the lucky winner of
the. Crosby Opera House, died very sud?
denly in Cincinnati, ou tho 17th ult.