The daily union. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1845-1857, 1855-03-09
THE PRESIDENTS APPROVAL OF THE TEXAS.
DFpY RIII

The President is between two fires on the veto question
One class Of opponents asas him ercey for interpreting
his negative against the Frenchspoliaton and Consue
bills whilst another class aTragns him for approving the
Texascreditors bin He fortunate however in having
so discTnEssd in exercising the veto power a. 10 be
easily deensibe against both classes of assailaa Our
remarks present VIII be confined the charges Of the
latter class prominent amongst whom the washn gton
correspondent Of the New York journal Of Commerce
When We come to and discuss the objections taken to
the approva- Of the Texas bill by this writer il viii be APP
parent that they derive their chief Importance from the in
uental character Of the journal in which they ara allowed
to appear
All who are familiar with the uniform opposition
tested by President Pierce in every political position
which be has been placed wasteul expenditure the
public money win be surprised in 50 respectable
paper the Journal Of Commerce the charge that was
induced approve the Texascredors bill by consdera-
lions growing out Of the necessity of getting rid Of the
plus in the treasury The injustice Of this imputaton
greatly aggravated when the writer proceeds affirm and
regret the President in approving the bin has
given democratic sanction the principle assuming
State debts If either Of these charges be true then has
President Pierce repudated the democratic antecedenrs of
his whole political M ana ppngea into The deepest abyss
Of federalism il neither ehargs Il true the Journal Of
Commerce has alloWed - President to be greatly
wronged, not say cnpanias.a through its columns
The bill appropriAies million seven hundred and
fifty thousand dollars the Texas CREDITOR On three ex-
press conditions first THAI ey receive this amount in
tai satisfaction Of their claims upon Texas second in fa
Of their claims upon the United States and third
that Texas shall fully release the United States from ali
claims for Indian dspredations As to six millions and
half Of this amount there is coniroversyt wss The
money apart in TeraEh act Of 1860 for the
creditors Texas and held in treasury on interest
until 1t amounted with the premium to six and half mil
lions The whole controversy regard to The additional
million and quarter and the question involved in APP
pF0prafon is, whether it gratuitous assumption OF
that amount Of the debt Of Texas whether il was APP
preparation for good and valuable consideration We
concede once that there no such consideration
the appropriation unconstitutional and involved the
recognition Of the doctrine Of the assumption Of State debts
concede Also that those members of Congress gno be-
eved that there vas 40 FOUNDATION for the claims Of
the Texas creditors upon the United States Of Texas
upon the United States for Indian depreationB we're
fnlly justified in yoting against the b and If Pres
ident Pierce had arrived the conclusion as to
the nvaldy Of these claims he would have bound to
the hn subject himself Justly to such censure AZ
merce To relieve the President entirely from such Or
sures viii be necessary only in brief nar1eg 70 state
the nature of the claims
i necessary for Texas during her struggle for indie
pendence 10 raise large amounts Of money on her credit
For this purpose her bonds issued and the revenues
derirAbe from impost duties were pledged Coz tsr pay
ment The bonas thus issued and secured were put
in market and sold a heavy discount The hold
.sF .R.a. fr.rs H.. r..
The bill The Of the bonds estimated according to
their face about eleven millions Of dollars bat Texas has
been unwilling acknowledge her liability 10 usy nara
than the amount actually regs,Ya5 b Aer with iz.er
est -hs il the foundation Of the charge Of arepu-
diatonr against Texas which has 30 seriously affected
her credit for many years The holders q The bonds
insisted payment according their fce-TexAs ia
sisted scaling the debt rs5aes her admitted
liability ssyeFl millions u dollars After Texas was an
pexed 70 the United States she ceased 10 collect the mpos
duties which had been pledged her creditors bur this
81 her passed into the treasury of The Uni
Ted staies On this fact the creditors up claim against
the United States insisting that the government had re-
esiEed the benefits o. The impos duties pleges t. em II
Lad bgaons Liable r the payment Of their bonds and they
insisted upon satisfaction according the face Of the
bonds Many prominent statesmen have admitted the
liability of The United States The flu extent claim
e By tie ersdit0rs Eminent legal have differed
in opinion to he liability Of the United States
some maintaining that Texas retAiaea Lss pubic
lands ns faui 70 pay ben debt, the United Siass
not Liable; whilst others coniendcd that this
was arrangement between fexas and the United
States without the q The creditors and there
FIRE that i did affect their right insist On hr
security originally pledged Cor sheir debts n the cred
iion were right - tbs controversy he United States
owed them largely than seven million seven hun
cred and hfy Thousand doIar 1.-THE United States were
right iheir liability the creditors was only the SIX ana
bali miliions.
1 q worthy q special Remark the controversy be-
tween Texas and her creditors a. 70 the amount = be paid
Ia already epss The United sntes ever million Of DOH
lars u interest ana In Ave years more would cost another
million and quarter say nothing 81 the benry
the egsativs litigation the subject BY Congress ~
TIE TsrasbOundAry Of ave millions in govern
meat certificates bearing annual interest q Eve per
cent provided pay the Texas creditors ese car
tcAics have been held already eve years 4 a. annual
cost p two hundrea and Gsy thousand dollars whilst The
government has been purchasing large premium it,
other securities In advance Of the time when thsy fell due