Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1869-12-09
Tor the Fayetteville Observer.
Bank Of Tennessee Notes
Union and American.


many others have great respect
and confidence for and in the doc
trines and teachings of the above
paper, and are accustomed to walk
therein; but it seems to me occa-
sionally, like some other machines,
to run off the track and leave its
patrons in the dark if not in the
ditch. For example: In its Issue
of the 3rd inst, is an article on
the State Finances" in which it
gives the financial condition of our
State all very correctly, and then
essays to point the way out Of this
bondage of debt, by levying and col
lecting taxes in a novel and dis
eliminating manner, to say the
least. Listen: SILK the tax at
three times as much as you wish
to collect in greenbacks, and au-
thorize the collector to take one
third of the amount thus fixed in
greenbacks y Nov, this Is novel
ity in political economy beyond
question, for which the learned
editor is entitled to full credit.
But why this novel recommends
ton? Because the Legislature
when it established the Bank of
Tennessee saw fit to encourage
and ensure the circulation of its
notes, to insert promise or pro-
vision that these notes should be
received in payment of all debts
or taxes due the State, which
nominated in the bond" the Leg
iislature afterwards, and alter the
said notes were put in circulation,
saw fit to repudiate; but the Su-
preme Court of the United States
said lately, the State couldn't and
shouldn't do any such thing
that it was q violation Of their
promise and a fraud upon the peo-
iple. That these notes they must
take according to promise in pay
ment of all taxes, &C., and the right
eousness of their decision the Un-
ion and American commended as
| Just and wise. But now that the
people are, in accordance with this
"wise and just decision "-oritis be.
lieved they are-going to pay their
taxes with these notes, straitway
the aforesaid editors turn round
and advocate a nea0 population Of
them by their good mother State
How ? is it asked. Why by rec.
ommending that they be taken al
33 cents on the dollar, as above
quoted--thus repudiating &c
cents of their nominal value
! Now is not this a policy novel in
) its morals, its logic and its legal
ity? But pray tell me where
: does the Union and American fine
) It's law for SHE policy it has sug
gested." Whence the authority
of the State or its Legislature IL
repudiatetwo.thirds ola debt which
: the Supreme Court say it is legal
lily and morally bound to pay
Whence its authority by this pol
icy to make this invidious distinc
ton between its promises and the
Irromises of the United States
reckoning her promises at one
third the value of those of the U
u.s.? Why not say 1-99th ? If
they can knock eff &c cents in
settlement, can they not SO cents
making greenbacks, not gold, the
standard at that /! And all this
too, in the teeth of the decision
which they profess to respect and
obey-that the State is bound and
shall receive her notes--I cay
her's-for she gave them life, be-
ing and credit--in payment of all
dues, taxes or what-not from the
people to whomor whose represent
atives she had sold or paid them.
And yet, the aforesaid editors, al
their "PoLIcY," recommend the
Legislature to adopt the principle
denounced alike by them and the
highest judicatories of the land al
illegal, fraudulent and void, to
wis violate her obligations, stul
tify her promises--say that bel
paper is worth only one-third of