The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1868-09-09
FIRST EDITIO N
THE NATIONAL BONDS.
Important FinanciaI DOcument-A Reply
to PendIetOn's Assertions.


On Saturday last Hon. George III. Pendleton
addres the Democracy of Huron county at
Norwalk Being desirous of receiving the pure
milk Of Democratic doctrine from the breast OF
it's recc gnized expounder. we went twenty miles
to listen to his address. Mr.. Pendleton uni.
Intention of misrepresentipg his opponents and
by cor ceding to them the same patriotism, con-
scientiousness and honesty of purpose which he
claims for himself. This at once disarms pre-
judice and prepares the listener for q candid
hour. How grievousiy that same listener is
doomed to be disappointed may be infer
the body Of his speech distors the truths of his
tory in the spirit of an advocate, states lust as
the remainder unsaid; admits no wrong in his
own party and comedies no good to the opposing
ae 3n9 a we as Mr Pendeppn so bsysh tile as That
of dema gogue, but we fear his Norwalk speech
will compel us to do this mentally, whether we
do 1t in public or not. By q demagogue we
mesn an artful orator who seeks TO influence
and lead the unrehectipg multitude by pander-
ing to popular and unworthy prejudices, by the
practice OF specious arts and the telling OF half
truths. n,
die toms state ments to another time, we shall
here refer only to his position on the question
bonds One of the leading counts In the speak
er's Indictment OF the Republican party was the
fact that the bonds OF the national Government
are exempt from State and local taxation. He
dwelt upon this q Republican outrage upon
hs rghss IL OF Of c and against
and an abuse which ought not To be tolerated
Stale in what way Democratic Administrator
would remedy the alleged hardship. Yet the
inference he intended TO have ignorant men
dlaw from hislanguage was that tue election of
Seymour and Blair would remove all cause for
complaint by securing the prompt and rigid
taxation of all national securities. He did not
even hint that there were grave legal and eco
nomicaI difficulties. If not insurmountable
obstacles in The way of local taxation of Gov.
eminent tonds He wished to profit by half
truth. This is the uniform course pursued by
Dem ocratic speakers and writers the country
Injustice done ReDuDli-
can party by Mr.. Pendleton's one sided state
pubcy 11S T state whst remedy he would appy % to
the evil of bond exemption. the writer Of this
sent the speaker note as follows-
n general eovefnme Mt are exempt from state and
local taxation. AS Republican. Oectfully ask
Has
yOp any remedy except to pay the bonds in green.
'''A' '''''' --''"'' 4. B. NETTLEroN.
When the above reached Mr.. Peudleton he
speaking. There was abundant time. now
ever, after Mckinney closed, for Mr.. Pendieton
require more than three minutes time, but
sfter reading the note to several persons on the
ing adjourned Nine. tenths of the Democrats
present went away believing that bond ex-
preston, and that there was not the slightest
reason In the world why States should not tax
Afterward, at the 81. Charles Hotel, Mr. PEN
dleton sent for the writer, and during an inter
view he explained that the written question
Ing, or he would have been pleased to answer
1t publicly. He then defined his position IN
substance, and, for the most part, In words, as
"The usual argument against state taxation
OF Government bonds is, that 1t Will not do for
the general Government TO give the several
States control over the market value of its
securities by admitting their right to tax them
like other property. But the practical difficulty
in the way of State and local taxation of the
does not assent to such taxation. Now would
have the general Government give this needed
The question was here asked:-"But must not
this assent be given when the bonds are issued,
buyingq" Mr.. Pendleton said:- '''O
"That Is an undecided question. My own
that the ean
change Its rule and rate of taxation after the
bonds nh have been Issued In my opinion there
present bonds shall not be taxed higher than a
specified rate. The Government changes its
rule and rate of taxation Oa other property
why not on Its bonds as well? But If there are
good reasons why State should not tax the
bonds then the National Government ought
itself to tax its bonds to an amount equal to the
tax, both State and national which is levied on
AS Mr.. Pendleton had had nearly two hours
to consider the question submitted TO him we
presume his reply Is one he is willing to stand
by. Let us see how it will bear brief exami-
The United States Supreme Court has decided
in five distinct cases that a Slate does not pos
sess the right to tax the bonds OF the United
States; first by Chief Justice Marshall in the
case of McCulloch VS.. the S'ate of Maryland
"A Wheaton, l6G again by the same Jurist In the
case of Weston VS.. the City of Charleston q
Peters, 449G again in The case OF Osborn vs. the
United States Bank; again in 1882 in the case of
the Bank OF Commerce vs.. New York q Black
620G and again in the case of Van Allen VS.. the
ASS ssors q Wallace. 5S5, Mr. Pendleton does
stons, II we understand him, but he would have
the National Government confer the right of
local taxation of lis bonds by act of Congress.
10 hU M nn0 OF hot 4 N 40 WIGHT
can be conferred. The question has never been
adjudicaled, but the best authorities lean to the
opinion that Congress cannot legally authorize
State or munic paltty 10 tax the bonds of the
United States. The States are restrained from
.levying kuch q tax by an implied provision of
the Constitution Itself, as was affirmed by the
Supreme Court In each of the cases we have
cited, and an act of Congress not repeal any
provision of the Constitution, ,eX press implied
In 1882, when measure involving this same
Webster, the "Dsfender of the Constitution"
held that Congress could mol by enactment
confer on State the right to tax the bonds OF
the United States He said:-
Now, sir, ask how relieve the States from
THIS constitutional Prohibition? II is true that this
results from the general provisions OF the ConsIitu-
non, ana mas been 1udclay decided TO exist In full
tuition Of the United states by lis own force, holds
over this institution which Congress has deemed
eminent SO soon as Congres1, exercising It's own
Judgment. has chosen TO create IT, ca we throw Off
think y clear we cannot. We cannot repeal the
Consultation. We cannot say that every power,
Government shall not have ali the force. ali the
sanction and all The protection which the Constltu.
We give this view of the case not as neces.
sarily committing ourselves to Its soundness
but as proof that IL Is by no means certain that
State can tax Government bonds even after
being authorized To do 80 by Congress. To go no
further. we have Daniel Webster on one side