New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1858-08-13

from TIA. cnir,-the whole Of it-alou-c De yours
and not ti,, II be be N honest ran sao no'
scourdrel, how car be Low put II CLAIM 'or au'
Part Of Il The speculation has turred out "e-i
but if i. bad proved otherwise, would 10 l''e
shs.sd your los,l Ii nO:, Why should ne '0a'o
your gain Adore al: vh,t light n' TO
debtor Government. - interpose between you,
arbitrarily substituting another contract Tor nav
you actually made, and taking your money TO coH''
per safe Ike victim Of i, irjn,sics and insolvency
Mr.. Randall comments on the case as follows
"Mr. Madison had made an effort 20 mitigate re
iriust;ce Of this bill, between tie hrst holder. ano
the speculs;pg purchasers Of the public o.
&c bt by moving an amendment which would nave
produced compromise between the interests OF me
part;es II provided that the present holder should
receive tie bghss. cash value that The csc
borne, ard tina. the residus up to then par value
should be paid to the original holder. de claned
that, inasmuch a. the public creditors had suierea
so,ey By the default o. tie Government me Govern
meut wss bound 10 exercise the highest pre'ogstite
of severe gnty 70 make reparaton TO tnemi auo &c
cited cases TO show that both the Engsh aad rTe.en
Covsrrmeuts bad sanctioned departures from the
ordinary rules Ct comm eical lav, 10 protect ndiYc
ua rights nperied by the action OF the government
and that 10 resulting Injury to public orecit Aso en
.ued He claimed, what was undoubtedly true, tHss
the United States had already acted an analogous
principle IN repuGsting ard attempting 20 make com
rensator o.I erwse 20 tie original holders OF re
currency. BE thought his proposition very lpeIa!
ore 10 the prese ut holders OF ceho aes
mad generally purchased them for from fifth Down 70
tenth Of then nominal value, and the Certificate nae
sudceply risen to half that nominal value on the puo
cation CT HsmIton's report TO Congress on tne So
ject His proposition would enable no.ders s,li 20
realize eevera hundred per centum on The morey they
had Invested
"Mr. Msdson's proposition wm sustained on ths
floor by severa members Gerry proposed inst tal
payment be made 10 present holoers, and then tns
ronpeusation be a,so made to q class Of the original
opes This proposition cid not meet much fayor
The GoverrInert too poor to be 90 magna1'
nous.
We submit that there was 10 "injns'Ice" what
ever in the bill as proposed and passed, and Mr.
Randall, by .oftening Mr. Jeferson's fraudulent
purchaser" into Specializing holders, depT'Tes
the case Of the only shadow Of leg j. lad to stand
upon. A speculAtirg purchaser implies cor
responding seller-implies perfect understanding
between them that the transfer Of the scrip was 'ne
transfer Of the entire claim. Dir. Msdisons propo-
sit;on was in effect device to satisfy the equitable
claim, Of one class Of public creditors al the e1'
pense Of another. The Government WAS morally
t" bound to make PREPARATION" to those who had SUI
fe1ed BY its defaults but they could not Justly con-
scate to that end the property Of its legal creditor
Had il been understood from the outset that the
Confederation would treat its creditors IS Mr..
Madison proposed to do, nobody would have bough.
the scrip at any price, the original holders could have
realized nothing from It in their utmost need;
and il would have often been taken for debt aid
sold on execution for next to nothing. Mr. Madison
(which, We presume, was really Dir. Jefferson >.
proposition involved redistribution Of private
property by the arbitrary fat Of Goveinment-It
was death. blow to public credit, because yio-
lation of public faith We cannot help thinking
that Mr.. Madison would have seriously regretted
its adoption and would even, had it been proposed
by another with a prospect of its adoption, hare
combated it as ably aud earnestly as he did Mr.
Jefferton's notion that public debt was obligatory
ONLY on the generation which incurred it.
Mr.. Geuy's proposition, which Mr. Randall
considers $50 magnanimOus," was simply and na-
kelly Just. We owed the original debt to the
bona fde holders Of the scrip, ard were bound to
pay them every cent of It. But We owed also
those no. having parted with their money or other
property en- the strength of our promises to pay
were disappointed and damaged By our failure to
do so according TO agreement, and were thereby
compelled to sacrifice their scrip to satisfy their
urgent leeds. If tie soldiers of the Revolution
had good claim to payment in the shape of pen
.ons for their losses BY the depreciation Of the
ContIe entail Money in which they were paid while
In service, those who trusted tie Govern.
ment during that trying tune, and were
heavy losers by its temporary insolvency, had
similar and equally valid claim. Dir.
Gerry, on this as on many other questions, touched
the true chord, and had Congress heartily AMI
promptly responded, We believe the effect on Pub
lie Credit would have been 50 signal and 80 sautsry
that the immediate outlay would ere this have beer
largely oyerbalanced by the stability and buoyancy
of that credit even in the dark hours Of the Last
War. But this is aside from the question which
we have here 90 fully discussed. Suffice it that We
find nothing in the history Of the Funding question
which should fix shadow of stain on The memory
of Alexander Hamilton.