Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1853-05-28
sUB-fREAstRY OPERATIONS.

think satisfactory one.
Our remarks were not intended to advocate
the interest of any particular individuals who
might be directly benefited by adopting the old
mode of making government transfers, as follow
| ell by Mr.. Guthrie's Democratic and Wing pre-
decessors. but our object to facilitate the ge-
neral business of he community, far as it
could be egitmately done. with entire safety to
the Treasury, and without the latter incurring
aoy risk expense whatever.
We still assert that it is safer for the Treasury,
aud certainly more I1antageous TO the business
community, to make the transfers in the mode
we have advocated than on the plan now followed
by the Treasury of transporting the coin from
| place to place.
Eve=v one prefers to trust his money ia the
! hands of a man worth million of dollars and in
| high credit to one who is entirely destitute of
pecuniary means, even if there was equal conf
dence 10 their moral honesty. In the former
case there is security in case of loss by accident
| OF neglgence in the latter we have resource of
the kind. And where is the possible objection
violaicn of the Sustreasury law, if the Secretary
appoints Mr.. A., banker worth million of dol
lars, o.. the special agent of the Treasury to
transfer $500, 900 to from New York to st.
Louis instead of Mr.. B., clerk in the Department.
| or Mr.. c., an express firm, the personal charac-
ter and integrity of all being equal! But the
plan we advocate provides still greater security;
for we contend that, without any reference to the
capita and credit of the party employed, he
should be required to depOsite collateral security
the fall amount in United States or other good
stocks until the transfer was completed and the
money paid, S, that there cannot be any contin>
gency by which the public Treasury could suffer.
If the late Wing administration or its Democrat
ic predecessors have been in the habit of making
such transfers without such collateral security,
| no matter what may have been the wealth or
| credit of the parties employed and no matter
| whether the transfers have been made success
fully and safely with jeopardy or national loss,
the mode is decidedly Objectionable, if nor CEN
surabe. When, therefore, the Union urges any
objection to the plan which we in common with
the entire business community, think most advi-
sable. it must find some other reason than the
risk of loss to the Treasury; for this mode is
absolutely without risk; whilst that adopted by
the Department is attended with both risk and ex-
peuse.
| The Union argues, on our statement that the
merchants of St. Louis are at present Transport
ting gold to New York, that if private individu-
ais find it safe and advisable to adopt this course
it is likewise so for the Government. but this is
begging the question, and it is not to tbs point.
The merchants of St. Louis adopt this course
from the necessity of the case, aud because they
have no other mode OF getting funds to New
York, whilst the Government, which wants
> $4,000 in st Louis refuses to accept that sum
10 gold from the merchants at that place, ia
exchange for like sum in New York, by which
all parties, as we'll rs the community at large
would be accommodated, and, by rejecting this
mode, obige the St. Louis dealers to send the
amount in gold, at great expense and risk to
New Y ork and the Government to incur the same
by sending their gold from New York to ST.
Louis.
But, since our late remarks on the sub ject, Il
new feature respecting it has been developed,
| hat If tba Of fl,a
United States on the Subtreasurer in this city,
have appeared in the bill markets of Charleston
F. and New Orleans, 10 order to crehte funds for
the public expenditures at those points. These
drafts, we presume, are not sold at less than par
and if so it is, as regards both expense and risk,
preferable mode to the transportation of coin, but
where in the Subtreasury act does the Depal tmeat
, find authority forthus turning bill broker and en-
tering into the exchage business in competition
with private individuals! If these treasury bills
of exchange thus being negotiated in the
above cities, presume we shall see them in
Wall street and in State street. and the Subtreus-
ury system become grand shinplaster estab-
| lishment fer promoting the paper circulation be-
tween the different commercial nArts of the
Union. When the subject of making mint cer-
ticates issued for gold bullion receivable for Gus
tom house dues was discussed, last winter, in
Washington, some of the faithful" objected to it
as being species of paper currency, though the
gold was actually in the hands of the Government
and the plan only enabled the owners or derlers
in gold bullion to realize their certificates few
days sooner than if they were obliged to wait
until the mint had act Tally coined it. Some OF
our Democratic friends could strain at that gnat
but Gao swallow the present camel OF gigantic
system of treasury bills of exchange in every
section of the country.
The Union did not deny, in its article of Fri
day-because it could not deny it-that the prac-
tce of Mr.. Corwn in transferring public money
was that of Mr.. Walker during Mr.. Folks ad-
ministration, viz: employing individuals to make
the transfers OF public funds; but the editor con-
tends that, under tbs peculiar circumstances of
the country. it was then in a measure necessary
to do so, and particularly in consequence of the
large amounts which the Mexican war required
should be transferred to the Southwest, and espe-
cialy to New Orleans. We do not exactly see
the force and application of this reasoning but
should rather imply from it, as the necessary res
suit, that such state OF things wondered ii more
necessary to transfer coin rather than to net
through individual agency. 1t was publicly
known ut the time that individuals were thus em-
ployed, but none of the Wing presses ever CEN
sured Mr.. Walker for it, did the Union or
any of its Democratic contemporaries find out
| that it was then violation of the Subtreasurv
law, but which, it appears, is the fact, according
| to the Union when the course is pursued
under a Wing administration.
The Union says the operation of the Sub
treasury SYSTEM. regards the keeping and trans
fer Of the public money, was only intended
to apply to the United States, aud not to
transfers and disbursements for account of the
United States abroad, but where it finds any dis
tinction i'll the above law we are unable to see
1t alludes to the inconvenience and DELAY which
would attend the shipment of coin abroad, but
we do not see that there would be any greater in
convenience or delay in shipping coin by one of
the mail steamers to London than in sending it
to St. Louis, New Orleans, Santa Fe, or Oregon.
If the United States require 500, 900 for diplo-