The evening telegraph. [volume] (Philadelphia [Pa.]) 1864-1918, 1870-03-03
THE FUNDING BILL.

THE necessity of refunding the national debt
in some mode that will reduce the rate OF
interest and thus diminish its annual burden
to the people, is now generally acknowledged,
and the recent discussions of this subject in
the United States Senate indicate that deoi-
sive action will be taken at no distant period
The prevailing differences affect rather the
details than the principle involved in such a
measure, and the leading points in dispute
are exemplified by the provisions of the bin
reported by the Finance Committee, through
Senator Sherman, on the one hand, and the
substitute proposed by Senator Sumner on
the other. Both propositions aim at substan-
italy the same end, and in some sections they
are almost identical. But as our readers may
be Interested in the divergences of opinion,
we will give brief abstract of the most inn
portant. ....
The first section of Mr.. Summers bill pro-
poses that ten-forty loan of $500, 200, 900,
bearing interest at the rate of five per cent,
shall be contracted, with the understanding
that only specie, or the fve-twenty bonds of
1862 at par, shall be received in exchange for
the new bonds. The first section of Mr..
Shermans bill proposes that ten-twenty five
per cent. loan of $40O, 900, 900 shall be con-
tracted, with the understanding that any of
the fve-twenty bonds may be received in
exchange, at par, for the new bonds which
would represent the new loan. Mr.. Sherman
alleges that nearly all the fve-twenties Of
1862 are held abroad exclusively, and he does
not see (nor do we) why such special pains
should be taken to advance the interests of
foreign bondholders by giving them the mo-
nopoly of the best new loan the Government
proposes to issue. Mr.. Sumner Is reason for
his preference is that, as the credit of the
five-twenties of 1869 has been most severely
attacked, it should receive the best pro-
lection, but this reason is not sufficient to
Justify the discrimination in favor of foreign
interests which he proposes to make.
The second and third sections of the re-
spective bills differ mainly in the fact that
Summers bills authorize aloan of $500, 900, 900
each, while Shermans bill authorizes two
loans of $4OO, 900, 900, and that the proposed
time of repayment is fixed at more distant
period by the Senator from Massachusetts,
than by the Senator from Ohio. Mr. Sher-
man also proposes that agents may be ap
pointed abroad as well as at home to nego'
tiate the new loans, and that coupons may be
made payable in Europe (whlle Mr.. Sumner
does not favor this policy, and Mr. Sherman
proposes to ensure the earnest cooperation oi
the national banks in disposing of the new
bonds, while Mr.. Sumner would leave them
comparatively Indifferent to the fate of the
new bill.
In brief, these differences may be summed
up in the general statement that Mr. Sher
mans project combines far better prospec
of practical success than the measure pro
posed by MIR. Sumner. 1t aims at borrowing
a smaller amount of money, adopts better
means to push the new loan, and make i
popular at home and abroad, asks a shorte
time for repayment, and makes better provi
sions for the inevitable day of redemption
And as the prime requisite of such measure
is success, it will be infinitely better to pass
law we'll calculated to attain the desired enc
than to cripple the nation with "How no
to do it" scheme. ..l .-t