The Georgia politicians aimed at having the restriction of the savings banks removed, so far as it related to their State, in order to afford them an opportunity of issuing several millions of 4½ per cent. bonds for the purpose of taking up an old issue of the 7 per cent. bonds, thus effecting a considerable saving to the taxpayers of their State in this reduction of interest. With the purpose of having this matter arranged as quietly as possible, two of the ablest lawyers of the State of Georgia were surreptitiously sent to Albany to make argument before the Attorney-General, Mr. Denis O’Brien, and to attempt to convince that official, in a very plausible manner, why the restriction should be removed from the savings banks in the case of Georgia. No opposition was expected, and the enthusiastic hope was indulged by those who were engineering the scheme that upon this _ex-parte_ statement of these astute Georgia lawyers a favorable opinion would be elicited from the Attorney-General of this State, which would justify the Superintendent of the Bank Department in issuing an order to remove the restriction which precluded the savings banks of New York from investing in Georgia bonds, on the ground that the State had not repudiated within ten years. The repudiation could be traced back thirteen years, instead of ten. Pursuant to this application, a small item of a few lines appeared in one of the Atlanta papers, which stated that Mr. Calhoun had just returned from Albany, having made a very strong and forcible appeal to the Attorney-General there, urging him that the restriction on the part of the savings banks be removed so far as Georgia was concerned. This item was telegraphed to me, and on receiving the despatch I notified the holders of the repudiated bonds, and wired the Attorney-General asking him when a hearing of the other side could be had. When the day arrived for the hearing before the Attorney-General, Mr. Calhoun was surprised to find that there was any opposition to his application, as the business had been so quietly managed that it was supposed by the Georgia members of the Bar that the bondholders would hardly be apprised of it until everything should be fixed according to the pre-arranged programme, and in favor of the repudiating State obtaining fresh and unlimited credit without settling up the old score. Mr. Calhoun was assisted in his able argument on the sovereign right of repudiation by the Hon. N. J. Hammond, Member of Congress and ex-Attorney-General of Georgia. In reply to these great lights of the Southern Bar, whose genius would have shone more brilliantly in an honest cause, I made the following address: Henry Clews’ speech before the Attorney-General of the State of New York, June 20, 1885: