Nashville union and dispatch. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1866-1868, 1868-06-18
THE BEGINNING OF SPECIE PAY.
MENTa

dupes and advocates are trying to catch
the popular ear with the promise of early
specie payments. The Radical Congress
is tinkering with the subject also. It is
thought that the glare and tinkle will
deceive the people. But they are miss
taken.
The New York Epeaing Post of the
llth says
The Senate has passed, without debate,
and with little attention from the public,
one of the most important bills Of the
present sessiOn--the bill legalizing gold
contracts. We hope the House will take
it up at once and sign it alec, and that the
President will sign il without delay.
"The bill, as our readers will remember,
in a very few words, authorizes what the
present law has been construed by the
courts 10 forbid-contracts between mer-
chants and others for the payment Of debts
in coin. That is TO say, while it does not
compel the payment in gold Of debts now
existing, while it leaves the force of all
present contracts unimpaired, and does not
even interfere with contracts TO be made
hereafter in legal tenders, it yet permits
and recognizes, before the courts, all con-
tracts made for the payment Of dollars in
gold.
"The bill, If it becomes a law, will pave
the way for a speedy, yet not forcible, re-
sumption of specie payments"
In commenting upon this the Cinein~
matt Enquirer forcibly exposes the fall
lacy and unfairness of this proceeding.
The legal tender law, says that paper,
was passed in 1862. All contracts, all
notes and obligations, then, by promise,
in terms, payable in coin, were author
lied to be paid in legal tender. They
were so paid Millions Of dollars-yea,
tens and hundreds Of millions Of dollars
were settled under this law The
whole business Of the country was
changed by it, and adapted to it Now,
after it has been in operation for years
after the courts have held that con.
tracts made expressly payable in coin,
did not, in fact, alter the contract, and
that every thing was payable in legal tend
ers-Congress is to provide that con-
tracts not heretofore determinable, or
which hereafter are to be made--shall be
made in coin, if such was the agreement
between the parties This is an act of
atrocious injustice toward those parties
who have already settled their monetary
engagements in legal tenders, where gold
was promised,
The law, in order to be fair and just
ought to have had a section providing
that all past contracts Of that character
should be legalized, and where a party
had accepted the legal tender condition
Of things, he should have a "right of
action for the difference between the
amount actually received, and the amount
he would have received under the gold
condition ofthings To pass the present
law without recognizing the previous
transactions to which we have alluded,
Is an act Of great injustice 1t is more
than that-it is a great fraud and OUT
rage, inasmuch as it is a discrimination
between, and in favor Of, citizens sub
ject to the same law
No law, therefore, that don't embrace
the past, should be listened 10 for one
moment The laws, if they protect one
man, should protect all
This movement is made by the bond
holders 1t Is made By those who bought
bonds at forty and fifty cents on the doll
lar, and, after receiving twelve or fifteen
per cent per year interest expect to re-
ceive the rate OF a hundred per cent on
the dollar principal They were not pro-
missed that in their bonds, but they ex-
pect to get it, nevertheless, by fund
used in Congress We are opposed to
it We believe that after getting their
paincipal back, together with their tro>
mendous interest, they viii have all that
they are entitled to.
The bondholders suppose that il they
can get specie payments resumed, all
their troubles viii be over Therein
they are mistaken. f even they could
accomplish the end desired, the question
would be, ought shey to receive par for
their bonds As they did not pay half
chat amount for them, this would be de-
cided against them.
Ii the law preventing a payment IN
should be first passed, the
next question would be, should they not
be paid in gold, according to the price Of
hat commodity at the time the owners
bought the DO nds2 Would that not be
lair and right2 Who would gainsay it 2
lf the bonds are to be paid in gold, TN
Ter an immediate resumption OF specie
payments, why sh ould the holders receive
more in gold the they paid for Them
specially as no particular mode Of payH
nent was promi sed at the time This
question viii Ire raised The bOndholder
an rely upOa it, The state Of public
ceiling Is such that it can not avoid being
aised hwp aid be no advantage to the
& resume specie payments
immediately. On the contrary, Is would
e for his dI advantage The bonds viii
9 paid in greenbaeks, according 10 the
rms Of M 2 contract, if the bondholders
III accept il II they will Motif they
isist upo q gOld-if thsy repudiate the
'ntract-- Heaven only knows where 1t
VI ems, The hohdhOldeTs mast remem'