Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1866-07-11
For the Advertiser.


construction have put upon certain corlmunica-
tions in your paper signed "RusTlc," and as
have no other than the'most friendly feaings for
him personally, I shall ondeavor 70 make the !
samcnde Honorable.
The questions now being discussed in your pa
Der involve so much Of public interest as toforbid
that and Capt. JONES should resolve what what we
have to say on theminto matter ofsprlvate al
tercation. accord to yo1r correspondent "hus-
TIC" who it seems is ny friend Capt THOMAS
JONES, motives of patriotism, and siacere DE-
sire to benefit our down-trodden country knf"
his sentiments in regard to the Indebtedness Oh
the people, before he was elected to the Legisia-
turc. and Ivoted for him with full knowledge
Of what his views were, and would do so again
under like circumstances. predicate oil that
was said about armed resistance, upon the closing
sentences of the call for = Public Meeting IN your
,,ner Of the lath Juno last. This meeting is
called "agreeable to suggestions OF " Rustic
ind in this call the following sentiments are ex-
pressed : Let the people speak out They have
tho right to- demonstrate, to petition for redress
cl their grievances And if all fails, let US claim
our homes us still our own. Let us cling to them
with tho grasp of desperation, regardless of con-
sequences"
These are the sentiments Of those good citizens
who call nPublic Meeting agreeable to the
sporestionc of I" Rustic" This call is signed
by Rustic's" eishbors, and if have done my
friend Capt. J. injustice in attribuipg to him any
sympathy with, or participation in, tho sentiments
publicly avowod by his neighbors mho call q
public meeting, agreeable to his suggestions
cordially ask his pardon. 1t may be that " Rus
tic" had nothing to do whit the drafting OF the
call for the public meeting aforesaid, and that he
isin no wise responsible for the sentiments avoW-
cd in it,. If so, I have done him injustice. 1t
may be also, that have put wrong eonstruc-
ton n the language used in the call for that
public meeting Let us analyze this language and
see what it means. No one can question the
right of the people to petition for redress OF
their grievances. This is an inalienabe right.
No one can object to fair remonstrnnce on the
part of the people against the enforcement Of the
law, if by the enforcement of the law the people
arc injured. But this call for "Public nesting
agreeable to the suggestions Of Rustic" does
not stop with the right of petition, and The right
of remonstrance. 1t goes still further and says
"Lct the people speak out. They have the right
to demonstrate, to petition fora redress OF their
grievances. And if all fails let US claim oul
homes as still our own. Let us cling to them
with the grasp of desperation, regardless Of con-
sequences"
It is true the terms armed resistance" are net
used in this appeal, but if the terms used do not
imply resistance to authority in the last resort
do not know what thoy do mean. And it "Rus-
tic" has no sympathy with the sentiments OF those
(his noighbors) who'called the public meeting,
agreeable to his suggestions, then have done
him injustice in applying the terms earned re-
sistancc to the Sheriff. in connection with the
plan of relief suggested by him. Capt JOKES
has done us the favor to reproduce the plan for
relief proposed by him., and IprOpose in fu-
turc communication, to consider his plan, and to
suggest some of the objections to it that occur to
my own mind.
In my last Communication Iventured to sug-
gest Plan by which the people may be relieved,
to great extent, from the immediate pressure Of
their indebtedness. This plan is, that the State
use ker credit for the present relief of her people,
by negotiating a loan of five millions of dollars,
for the purpose of lending it to her citizens, on
mortgage Of real estate, for the term Of thirty
yeara. I propose now to consider the rractca-
bility of this plan; and
Ist Can the State borrow the money! If it
be true as "Persanne" thinks, that tho State has
no credit, then of course nothing can como of it;
and the plan is impracticable. But is this true IN
fact? agree with Persuune" that Sin order
for the State to borrow money she must issue her
bonds, and those bonds must be based upon some
unouestionab,c tangible security,"-a security
permanent, enduring aud Interchangeable. Now
can the State offer such security?, In the hrsi
place the bonds arc not ordinary State bonds
Tho money is not to be borrowed for the ordinary
purposes of the State. Nor is it proposed that
tho interest is to be paid upon these bonds by the
usual method of taxation. The money is to be
borrowed for n specific purpose, and is TO be lei
|
tate, worth actually moro than the amount for
which it is mortgaged. And capitalists would
be informed that they will have tho benefit OF
the mortgage, in addition to,he faith of the State,
as security for the payment of the annual interest
and of the principal when it fallsdue. Now the
land area of the State Of South Carolina s csti-
mated to be 29,3S5 square miles, and counting
G4O square acres to the square mile, gives lS,sO6,-
400 square acres of land in the State. Is this no
basis for credit? And aro capitalists so dull as
not to be able to see that there would really be
very little risk in loanins money upon such sccu-
rity? 1t may be said that this land does not be-
long to the State; that it is the private property
of her citizens. Neither docs the State propose
to borrow the money for her own usc, but for her
citizens to enable her citizens keep their lands
Il is therefore not unreasonable that the citizens
who OWNS tho land and need the money, should
pledge their lands for the repayment Of so much
of the money as they borrow for their own use.
because the State had difficulty in borrowing
100000 in the winter Of 1865, in the usual way,
is no satisfactory reason that she would not be
able to borrow u much larger sum for the purpose
indicated, to bo secured in the manner proposed,
and at very reasonable rate Of interest Meth
er would regard the fact that that the City of
Charleston lfail-d to borrow money ut the rate OF
five per cant. por month, rs my satisfactory rea-
son Why tho State of South Carolina should fail
to borrow money in the manner proposed, at n
reasonable rate per cent. interest, because the
ofrer on the part of the City to pay five per cent
per month showed that she had no faith in hOr
own credit. would be unwilling that the State
should borrow the money for the purpose indi-
eated, unless the bonds could be sold at or about
par value. And upon tho security, proposed to
annra. 10 ihn nnnitalist i cnn see no rcasop why