Mississippi Democrat., 1846-05-06


ed, the whole amount ought TO be paid, but
tlhat when he had parted with it, the holder
should only get what he had given for il
with interest. They took the ground that
it was unjust that the many should be tax
ed for the benefit of the tew-thus recog-
niZing the great principle that the people
ought not to be taxed for any other than
strictly governmental purposes.
In this country, where the personal and
religious rights Of the people are well Sc
cured by the various State constitutions,
an abuse of the taxing power is the only
thing they have to fear. 1t is the only in
strunentality by which they can be op-
pressed by government. Are the taxes
just?-i5 the question OF questions with
the many, the pivot on which all our cleo
lions, State and National, turn. This 1t is
that divides the country into two parties,
one contending for high tariff and ma
tIonal bank-the other opposing these, be-
cause they tax the people uniustly, and for
other than governmental purposes. True,
the advocates Of those measures do not
propose them as means of taxing the
peopIe-but that such is the effect, we
think is very clear and self.evident 10 the
impartial observer. The advocates of
those measures attempt to hoodwInk the
people by talking about " protecting home
industry" " regulating commerce and er-
change" "a sound Currency," etc. So
do the advocates of tardtjOp to pay debts,
made for other purposes than the egin-
mate support of government They talk
! ,ynrU r,rattiIv oh State f,;Jb &
and dignity of the State,'' - opinion of TO-
. reignerS," ETC., with the view of keeping
the real question in the back ground, and
from the people. While thus amusing the
people with high sounding words, they are
trying TO sell them forever, for the benefit
, of European and American stockholders.
Having made these general and preIim-
nary remarks, which seemed relevant to
the question, and called for in order to full
ly understand and appreciate its impor-
tance, we will pay our respects to the wri-
, ter alluded to at the beginning Of this ar
ticIe, with the view of defending and JUS
utylng The State of our residence for the
) course she has taken respecting certain
bonds, sold to the United States Bank in
1888. We have, as yet, discussed the
, question as If there was no constitutional
prohibition against making debts, and think
we have shown most concluSiveIy, that
the people of any government have the
right, moral and legal, of repudiating any
debt, not clearly made for the support OF
, government economically administered.
With Mississippi the case is stronger, if
possible, as, in addition TO the conserva-
tive feature incident to all governments,
we can plead our constitution against the
bonds Of 1888. We have a clause in our
constitution which deprives the LegsIa
, ture of the power of making debts, or
pledging the faith of the State, without
consulting the people with reference to
the subject. This part of our constitution,
all important in the discussion of the ques
$ ton OF Mississippi repudation, the writer
: in question makes it convenient TO over
look, Perhaps we ought to be charitable,
e and suppose that he did not know of its
y existence. This, il SO, evinces a Gu pa
: bie ignorance, wholly inexcusable on his
t part. He should not have been in such
t haste to condemn sister State, as to neg
2 Iect the examination of both sides of q
great du' iIilpuFliHl question.
it The portion of our constitution shat pro
}, hibits the making of debts, reads as fol
lows: " No law shall ever be passed to
e raise a loan of money upon the credit Of
r the State, or to pledge the faith Of the
: State for the payment or redemption o.
e any loan or debt, unless such law be pass
s ed in the Senate or House OF Representa-
IS tives, and be agreed to by ma ority o
the members of each House, and entered
e on their journals, with the yeas and nay'
II taken thereon, and be referred to the mex
e succeeding Legislature, and published TO
< three months previous TO the next regua
= election, 10 three newspapers of this State
)t and unless a majority of each branch o
Df the Legislature, SO elected, after such pub
IS ication, shall agree TO aud pass such loan
d. and, in such case, the yeas and nays shal
'e be taken and entered on the journals o
e, each House. ~ (Art. VII. Sec. 9.) Thi
e, clause was inserted, in order to preven
J. the people from being involved in deb
Sc without their consent. This makes it III
e perlous on the Legislature to have the LAY
to proposing to borrow money, or to pledg
n. the faith of the State for any loan, submit
O. ted to the people, and made public by beln
It, published, so that they may carefully an
I'd deliberately examine the same, and b
IN prepared to judge of the propriety of bol
/ rowing the money, or pledglng the faith {
the State, for the purposes therein mer
he toned. Any law, borrowing money,
ly pIedging the faith of the State, passed b
in one Legislature only, is necessarily nu
r, and void, because IN UioIatjon of the fuI
r. damentaL LalD of the State.
at Before giving the history of the bono