Arkansas true Democrat., 1858-01-26
From the Boston Post.

merit than l can justly claim.
 1 may be regarded as the suggester of the sub. treasury system, but 1 am not its author And for the primary suggestion l must acknowledge myself indebted to the framers of the United States constitution.
 Early in 1883 published History of Pa- her Money and Banking in the United States" to which was prefxed "An Inquiry into the Principles of the System" The plan of the work made it necessary to take survey of the whole ground. As regarded league of state banks as worse even than a United States bank, I could do no otherwise than urge the adoption of the plan which then believed, and which still believe, the framers of the constitution had in view.
 In the latter part of 1894 became clerk in the U. s. treasury department. My position enabled me to have free intercourse with Presi- dents Jackson and Van Buren, with the mem- bers of their cabinets, and with the members of Congress. But, all the reasons could urge, had, except with few, little effect, till the "Pet Bank" system exploded in 1887. Being pre- pared for that event, 1 had, in ten days after the fact was ascertained, a pamphlet ready for the press, entitled "An Inquiry into the Pro- prety of Separating Bank and State." That pamphlet was repubshed in some of the lead ing journals, and, if it had no other effect, it brought on me great deal of abuse from the friends of both the United States bank and of the state banks
 The sub-treasury act of July 4, 184O, was framed by the Hon. Silas Wright, assisted there- in, perhaps, by President Van Buren, always regarded it as very defective in its details.
 Into the subtreasury act of August 6, 1846, I and fellow clerk, when brought before a committee of Congress, succeeded in introducing some amendments, but by no means all that were desirable.
 If there is any merit in having for nearly 30 years, through evil report and through good re- port, conteded for the separation of bank and state, have that merit; but am not the author of the sub-treasnry system. l say for nearly thirty years From 1921 to 1923 was editor of the United States Gazette, and from 1923 to 1881 of the Philadelphia Gazette. In both those journals supported, so far as opportunity allowed, the principles afterwards set forth in the " History and Inquiry" At least as early as 1880 I took stand in the editorial columns of the Philadelphia Gazette in favor of the separation of bank and state. 1 did not stand George Emlen, Condy Raguet, Clement c. Bid dle, James Ronaldson, Roberts Vaux, and oth- CTS. Of that original band of sub-treasury men l
 In like manner your correspondent gives me more credit than 1 am entitled to for my labors in Arkansas.
 It is true that I have labored faithfully to disentangle the affairs of the Real Estate Bank. But when I arrived at Little Rock 1 found Judge J. Gould, Wm. R. Miller, esq.,, the pre- sent auditor of state, John H. Crease, esq, the present treasurer of the state Gordon N. Peay esq, the receiver appointed by the court of chancery, and his able assistant, the late John William Newton, esq, all engaged in this duty. As Judge Gould found that he could not remain in this position without suffering in his private affairs, he soon afterwards resigned. Itrequred the united efforts of myself and the gentlemen with whom remained associated, to bring into order he accounts of bank and four branches, extending through period of nineteen years.
 The affairs of the State Bank are not yet dis entangled. 1 am now engaged In an effort to preform that duty, in conjunction with A. H. Rutherford, esq, the late treasurer of the state, Hugh G. Wilson, esq.,, the financial receiver of the bank, and J. w. McConaughey, esq., the state attorney and land agent.
 The solid treasury system of Arkansas, and the act prohibiting the circulation of all notes of a less denomination than five dollars, were adopted before 1 entered the state. The merit of these belongs solely to the people of the state and their constituted authorities, and, among the latter, especially to Governor E. N. Con- way, and the last two or three legislative as- sembles.
 The notion that Arkansas has repudated her public debt, appears to have had its origin in the misconception of a transaction between the Real Estate Bank and the North American Trust and Banking Company. In Sept 1S4O, the officers of the bank, without having any legal authority so to do, pledged 500 of the bonds of the state for 5000 each, with the Trust and Banking Company, for loan of S25O, 900, of which they obtained only S12l,3 The Trust and Bank ing Company, by breach of faith, passed ove these bonds to lanes Holford, of London.
 At the session of the legislature, which com menced in Nov l84O, these bonds were repre- sented, in the report of the bank as being on hand There is no trace on the records of either the bank or the state, of this surreptitious pro- ceedng till July, 194l. In November of that year the stock holders of the bank held meet ing, at which they resolved that thed would not pay the bonds that had thus improperly been disposed of while they, at the same time ad- mitted the obligation to pay the money that had actually been borrowed on these hypothecated bonds, and the interest thereon.
 In 1841 the holders of the hypothecated bonds applied to Governor Y ell to have their validity ac knowledsed. He replied: "To admit any other than a strict construction of the authority grant ed by the charter, might involve the state in the payment of any illegal contract that the rapacity of the banks and the connivance of stockjobbers might think proper to infct" .
 In his message to the legislature in Nov, 1842 he said" However much the people of Arkansas may be disposed (and none are more so) to sustain her faith and credit in the pay ment of all just and legal claims, she would nevertheless be unworthy of the character of a sovereign state if she tolerated for moment the idea of paying for bonds illegally and fraudu- ently disposed of."
 If denying the obligation to pay bonds that were illegally and fraudulently disposed of'' be repudiation, thus far the people of Arkansas are repudiators, but no further. have careful. ly examined the journals of the house and the senate, and the other public documents, and cannot find in them one word which countenan- ces the idea of repudiating any other of the bonds issued by the state. On the contrary. every governor Arkansas has had since 194O has in the fullest manner acknowledged the obligation to pay the debt, and dark though the times were in 1848 the legislature, by joint resolution, did the same.
 All the bonds were issued for the benefit of the banks. When the act to put the State Bank in liquidation was passed, and when the Real Estate Bank made an assignment, it appeared, from the accounts they rendered, that their as- sets would be sufficient to redeem the whole of the bonds and the interest on them These as- sets have yielded much less than was originally expected, but considerable sums have been re- alized from them, and it is still hoped that the assets of the Real Estate Bank will ultimately yield enough to redeem all the bonds issued for its benefit, leaving only part of the bonds s- sued for the benefit of the State Bank to be otherwise provided for As all the bonds were issued for the benefit of the banks, the people of Arkansas insist that the assets of the banks shall, in the first place, and so far as they will go, be applied to the payment of the public debt
 For the benefit of the Real Estate Bank, 1850 bonds for 1000 dollars each, and bearing six per cent interest were issned and fairly diSnosad