Marshall County Republican. (Plymouth, Ind.) 1856-1878, 1867-08-29
The gepnblisan.
SENA TOR SHERMAN AND THE
FINA NOES

.SENA TOR SHERMAN AND THE
FINANCES.
We copy from a speech of Scnatol
Sherman, delivered at Canton, Ohio, th'
following remarks on our financial system
and public Indebtedness. The position o
Mr.. Sherman as Chairman Of the Commi.
tee on Finance I'm the Senate Of the United
States, renders his views more than ordi-
parily interesting. Our readers will fine
his speech well worthy of perusal, being
an able slndication of the financial legisla
ton Of Congress, and at the same time &
warning of the certain increase of the pub
lie debt in case the Democratic party
should be restored to power:
FINANCIAL QUESTIONS.
There are some questions not specially
involved IN this canvass, but which are
very important can only allude to them
very briefly, and chiefly in reply to what
Judge Ranney said to you the other day.
They are financial questions growing out
of the war. You will observe that these
doctors do not agree at all. Judge Thur
man, Judge Ranney, Mr.. Vallandigham,
and no doubt many others, talk about
debt and taxes and banks merely to excite
opposition, but the Democratic party have
not taken, and dare not take, definite posi-
tions on any OF them. Until the last mig
ger" is exhausted, they will not meet fairly
these great questions. Judge Ranney is
opposed TO an increase Of paper money.
while Thurman wants to pay off our bonds
in mere greenbacks, or mere rags, as he
calls them, and Vallandigham is in favor of
paying the whole debt by an issue of
greenbacks. The question with you will
be whether the Union party, which is en-
titled to the credit ofthe wonderful success
of our financial measures, can best solve all
new problems as they rise, or whether the
public credit can be safely committed to a
party that, during the war, did all they
could 20 destroy our credit Let us look
at some OF these matters. They talk of
our large public debt Very well, our
debt is large but what caused il? A Dem
ocrotic rebellion. We had to choose be-
tween a great war and its inevitable Incl
dents, debt and taxation, or on the other
hand, the overthrow of the National Gov
ernment. The Union party preferred war,
debt and taxes To- disunion. Did the Union
party unnecessarily increase the debt OF
impose unequal or unjust lakes? On the
contrary, our financial measures were as
successful as our military measures, while
the efforts ofthc Democratic party impair
ed our credit, made il difficult to negotiate
loans, prolonged the war and increased the
debt. And now that the war is over what
party is likely to increase the debt? We
have the fact before us that the Union par
ty has not only prevented an increase of
the debt, but its reduction has been steady
and rapid. On the 3lst day Of August
1865, il was 81, 151, ,s03.6s6 On the first
day OF November, $50, il was 50, ,55l ,424,-
I2l, or reduction of S2O6,379, 500. On
the first day of August, 1861, il was S2,5lI,-
3OG. .436, or total reduction of s2i6,379,-
$50 in less than two years. And during
these two years We also paid off an i'm
mense floating debt, the debris of the war.
suppose the Democratic party now in pow
er, who does nW know that the debt
would be largely increased. The ONLY,
Democratic States, Kentucky, Delawai.
and Maryland, arc now demanding untold
millions as pay for their slaves. Every
] Democrat is cOmm.tted to their payment
All over the South they are pressing claims
for injuries during tho war. A Democratic
Congress would grant them all. Nearly
every Democratic Senator and member has
committed himself to principles which. if
once adopted, will add to your debt five
hundred TO one thousand millions of dol
lars For this reason they constantly cx-
aggerate the amount OF the public debt
! Let us see what it is. 1t is audited, and
we know to dollar the amount. | read
/ from the last official statement of the Sec
rotary of the Treasury. The aggregate
debt less cash in hand, August |. was ST.
81 ,306. 1876, but of this $780, ,5S3 is in
-greenbacks and fractional currency not
paying interest, leaving the interest bearing
debt 81, 1000, 600. Now, If | have my
way this debt will not be increased one
dollar on any pre,eXt whatever; but will
surely and gradually be paid Oft.
/ II is said that this debt is not subbie ect to
taxes, and that this discrimination is un-
just to other tax payers. Now, this debt
as property or income held by our citizens
is subject 10 taxes by the United States
Congress may impose taxes on 1t, as 1t does
on other property or income. These bonds
now pay income tax, but ii is not subject TO
State lax. This is true, but whose fault is
il? Did the Union party make this eX-
ception! Not at all. 1t was made by the
Constitution of the United States, for which
our Democratic friends, when it suits their
purposes, profess such profound Difference.
The Supreme Court Ofthe United States, as
early as 1919, decided that Bonds of the
United States are not subject to any tax by
or under State authority. This decision
has been followed in multitude of cases
since. Ii SO happens that every Judge that
has sat on the Supreme bench from 1919 tn
this time has had this question before him,
and each one concurs in the same opinion,
The principle is obvious, that the power oi
Congress to borrow money is paramount,
and can not be taxed or interfered with
without destroying it. To allow State to
taxnational loans may enable State to pre-
vent the nation from borrowing money.
Now, these decisions are very well known to
as good lawyers as Thurman and Ranney
but instead Ofstafing them fairly they blame
the Union party for cxempting the bonds,
while all United States bonds have been
exempt from local taxes since the founda.
ton ofthe Government, by the Constitution
itself, and this has been acquiesced in by
every administration, including the Demo
cratic. The first loans during the war con
tanned no reference TO this constitution al
exemption, but in subsequent laws, after q
recent decision by Judge fancy, in Decem.
Der, 1862, that United States bonds could
not be taxed, we inserted declaration in
one of our loan laws that United States
bonds were not taxable by or under State
authority. This did not change the law, but
simply declared the law In view of thi,
very question, and Of the certainty thai
when the war was over our restored credit
would enable us to borrow money on more
favorable terms, we always kept in view in
issuing bonds the principle of ''redeema
bility" at the pleasure ofthc United States
on short time. This was fixed policy
of your financial agents. This is the rea
son Of your Five-twenties and your Ten
forties. The United States may pay of
any portion of our debt within q shori
time, either by taxes orby borrowing mon
ey on more favorable terms. Nothing now
stands In the way except the Treasury
notes known as the Seven-thlrties, which
1 I'LL h. =