The republic., 1851-06-14
The xax the MONEY goes.

The way the Money goes.
We have observed paragraph in some Of
our exchange papers animadverting upon the
manner in which the public money is squan-
dered by the Administration. 1t alleges that
the last Congress ordered an ''old claim" to be
paid to the Chickasaw Indians, which amount-
ed to more than half million of dollars, with
interest for number of years at the rate of five
per cent. per annum The interest and princi-
pal on this payment, up to February last,
amounted to eight hundred and sixty-nine
thousand dollars. Whereupon the chronicler
remarks, in paroxysm of virtuous Indignation,
''this is the way the public money goes"
Now, let us analyze all this, and see what is
the plain English of it. Congress, it seems,
ordered the payment of an sold" claim. 1t is
not alleged that the claim was not good one,
or that the money was not due The implied
averment is that the money had been due a
great while, and the inference is that therefore
the money ought not to have been paid at all.
That is to say, if an individual or a govern
ment can succeed in stavlng off the payment of
its just debts till they become ''old claims" the
foundation is laid Of a good reason for with
holding payment altogether. In this case de-
linquency is assumed to be a substantial ground
of final exemption. This would be a very
convenient morality for persons who entertain
repugnance to the payment Of their debts;
but we apprehend that it would hardly an
swer in the long run as rule Of public or in
diyidual conduct.
Then, again, this claim was not only old, but
it was claim of Indians, and Cluckasay In
dians. Here is no doubt an aggravation of the
enormity of such a payment. Ifthe creditors
had only been white men, civilized men, it
might have been allowable to pay them even
an old claim; but, when they were Chickasa,c
Indians, it must be obvious to the meanest ca
pacity that Congress could not have been in its
right mind TO think Of the liquidation of any
such demands. To be sure, we have value re-
ceived for all we have purchased of the Indians,
and have possessed ourselves of their fair hunt
ing grounds for merely nominal consideration
We have bound ourselves to pay what these
Indians were compelled to receive. We have
their lands, and they had an cold claim" for the
consideration money. But what can be more
idle and extrav agant than the idea of paying
money to Chckasaw Indians, when we have
length of time?
But there were other features of enormity in
this transaction. We had not only owed these
Chickasaw Indians long time, but we had
owed them large sum Of money. If it had
been small sum, it might have been paid
without exposing Congress to rebuke. But i,
is certainly not to be tolerated that Congress
should pay large sum that had been due a
great while, whatever it might have done with
little sum. If an individual has owed little
money long time, he may pay it without any
Impeachment of his economy; but if he has with
held large amount from his creditor, and
finally consents to pay it, it is clear case for
commission. He is obviously squandering his
estate in paying his debts, and ought to be
forthwith placed under guardianship.
But we have not yet exhausted the causes o
impeachment Congress has not only paid mo
ney Justly due to Indians, and long withheld
from them, and large amount of it, but it has
paid them interest at fire per cent. This is =
clear loss to the natisn. What is the use o.
withholding money for long series Of years, il
you pay interest for it even at the lowest rate.
If Congress had refused to remunerate these
poor-devil Indians for retaining their money, the
country would have saved half a million of dol
lars, more or less. BY refusing TO pay the prin-
cipal they would have saved nearly million
Of dollars to the Treasury. What an excess OF
extravaganza, 10 be sure, to pay Indians, and
Chickasa,c Indians, either principal or interest
when the whole might have been saved par
ticularly when we had owed the money 70
such length of time!
We have made fair statement of this com
plant. There is no allegation that the none,
was not justly due to the Indians, nor that j
has not been unjusily detained. IL is admitted
on the contrary, that the debt was an homes
one, due for long time. The avermenis il
objection to its payment are that it was larg
debt. that the creditors were Indians, that i
has been owing long time, and that the par
ties were remunerated for the unjust detentio,
of their honest dues. And the commentar,
is--"this is the way the public money goes
We submit that, il nations and individual
make no worse use Of their means than that o
employing them in paying their honest debts
their money can hardly "go' in any bette
direction.