The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1867-10-02
OUR NATIONAL FINANCES.
LETTER FROM GENERAL BUTLER.


My high respect for the editor, the paper, and
its readers prompts me to a reloinder which
may contain little more clearly the exact state
ment of the question at issue between us.
My most earnest desire is that the Govern
ment shall fully, honestly, and exactly meet
every one OF its obligations, according to the
exact and equitable condition of every contract
it has made with its creditors. would advo-
cate nothing short OF this, and justice and good
faith require nothing more.
/ asserted that the $40 bonds were payable as
to their principal in currency, and not In gold.
This the Tribune denies, and insists that they
are payable in gold.
The whole question is, what was the contract
between the Government and its creditors?
The first $50, 900, 900 loan OF August, 1861, was
Issued at 7'30 interest-principaI and interest,
payable in gold-was 80 taken and so paid.
When the $40 loan bill was passed, 1t established
the interest at six per cent, payable in gold,
but said nothing as to the currency in which
the principal was to be paid.
When the $40 loan was before Congress,
Judge Spaulding of Ohio asked Mr.. Stevens,
Chairman of the Committee on Appropriations,
who reported 1t, If the principal of these bonds
was payable in gold, as well as the interest?
To which Mr.. Stevens replied, that the principal
was not payable in gold.
At the same session, when the first 500 loan
bill was passed, the legal-tender act was also
passed, providing for the issue of what are now
known as "greenbacks u 1t was therein pro-
vided, and so printed on the back OF every note,
that 1t is legal tender for every debt public and
private, except duties on imports and the inte-
rest on the public debt fit was not TO be re-
celved for principal OF the public debt, why
Besides, the act made it receivable by the
United States for all its loans, and specially
convertible into $40 bonds.
Again, in the following Congress, while por-
ton OF the 500 loan was yet untaken, another
l0-4O loan was authorized, at per cent. in-
terest; both principal and interest of which,
by, the terms of the act, were made payable in
gold.
Now, if it was the contract of the Government
that the per ccent $40 bonds we're, interest
and principal payable in gold, although directly
the contrary was stated on their face why was
1t that the Government offered 10-40 loan at
8 per cent, interest and principal both payable
in gold?
In other words, how could the Government
expect the per cent. gold-payable and gold
bearing loan to be taken up, when it had the
6 per cent. gold-payable and gold.bearing loan
still before the country
You say that the Tribune was '1argely, izea.
lousy instrumental, at the request of the Gov
ernment through its agents, in persuading the
people to let the Government have their money
for these bonds We assured them, day after
day, that every one. would be paid in full in
coin, principal and INTEREST,"
Now, the 10-40 loan was put upon the mar
ket by Jay Cooke; as the agent of the Treasury,
and ii you will consult the files of the Tribune
containing the advertisement of that loan, you
will find that Jay Cooke advertised the 1O-4O
loan as the only loan of the Government the
principal and interest of which was payable in
gold.
have not seen that advertisement in the
Tribune, but it was so advertised; aud assume
Jay Cooke took advantage of so valuable me-
dium OF advertising as your paper, to make
known that important fact of the desirability of
the lO-4O loan, as he certainly did so advertise
in other papeFs.
You further say:-"General Butler uttered no
word of dissent then" /, e., when the loan was
upon the market: True, because there was no
occasion. And still another, and perhaps
equally available answer - General Butler at
that time had other public interests in another
branch of the service to contemplate and try to
serve.
Again:-You do not deny that this $40 loan,
in whatever it is payable, is now due at the
option of the United States. That is, the five
years have passed at the end of which, by their
terms, the United States reserved the right to
pay them; and the Government has the right to
pay them to-day in whatever currency the con-
tract calls ior-whether gold or paper;
II these bonds are payable in gold, why are
they selling at from l08 to liz in currency when
gold is worth l43 to l45?
If the United States should now choose to ex-
ercse its right TO pay them-fwhich would seem
to be wise as they are untaXable, so that their
interest is, in fact from one to three per cent.
higher than six per cent to the holder)-in that
case why should the Government be called upon
to pay them in gold or its equivalent in cur
rency, say lab, when anybody else can buy them
at liz?
Why should the Taxpayers be called upon to
| pay the holder from 30 to 40 per cent. more in
| order to redeem these bonds than, as they now
have the right to do, the capitalist is now will
| ing TO sell them for to anybody else?
Assuming that no man can doubt, In view of
| the legislation of Congress, and the words of
| the contract, that these bonds are payable in
| currency, my next proposition is-That the
United States shall issue a new loan upon such
terms as sound finance shall show to be most
advantageous, and with the proceeds pay its
| $40 creditors, and thus reduce the rate of in
| terest, while at the same time it keeps exact
/ faith In its contracts.
l am unable to zee that this is ga dodge" OF
| ''repudiation,n (which is a longer synonym for
i rascality," or anything "irreconcliable with
/ common honestly "These be hard words, nv
masters" AS do not think they add anything
| to the strength of the Tribune'S argument upon
| q legal question relating to finance, certainly
i can neither reply to nor return them.
ment of the Tribune, and, therefore, refrain
from discussing any Of the collateral branches
| of this subject
| May ask-as the question is one OF great mo
| ment to the country-you in justice aud fairness
| to give this letter the same conspicuous inser.
| tion in the daily. weekly, semi weekly Tribune
/ which you gave the attack
| Common honesty" would seem to require
this. Very truly yours, b. F. BUTLER.
Reply OF Mr.. Greeley TO General Butler
ON Finance.
| We print here with letter from General Ben
| jamin f. Butler explaining and justifying his
| late utteTances which recommend the payment
of our national debt in national paper We beg
| the reader 10 note that General Butler Is Youn
teer in this controversy. His views were elected
| by no requirements from us, nor 1--WE belieVe)
| from any one. He must have known, before he
| gave them utterance, that they were such as we
and many 1--WE think mos) loyal Americans