Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1873-05-13
OPPOsITION To FUNDING MEANS
REPJ DIATEON.
From the Memphis Appeal.

-. From the Memphis Appeal.
We are aware that the opponents of the
funding law, enacted at the last session of
the Legislature, deny that they are in favor
of Reputation. This is amatter, however,
not to be settled by mere assertion, but by
facts. If they are not ia favor of repudia-
ton, why are they CO.'S; antly arguing that
the State is unable TO pay the interest upon
her debt and TO inset her current expenses?
That the debt ought to be paid they cannot
deny. The coupons have not been paid
for several years, and now TO refuse either
TO pay or TO fund them, means reputation
of hem, and can mean nothing else. If a
man vii not pay cebt when it is dle,
and will not give bis note for it, this
means that be does not intend to pay at
all. If the opponents OF funding intend
TO pay the coupons which have remained
unpaid Cor years, By levying a tax upon
the people for that purpose, they
will increase the taxes much more
than will be done under the funding law.
If they neither intend TO pay these coupons
nor to fund them, then that is outrighG re-
pudiation. In fact, all the arguments used
by the opponents of funding look toward
reputation. They are trying to create the
impression that the State is unable to pay
even the interest upon her debt aud her
current expenses. This is not true, but it
shows that they are trying TO prepare the
public mind 10 Tepudiate the debt. Let
them throw away their disguise, and open
" advocate the doctrine which they are in
in reality favoring, though under cover, and
the public voice will condemn them most
uncquiyocally. To show that We are in
earnest in our position, it may be stated
that soon all the debt Of the State will be
funded under the provisions Of the funding
act, and then the interest must he paid, or
reputation is inevitable. Why is there
any Us5 10 now opposing the funding bill,
after il h1s become law, and the prOvis-
ions of it carried into effect? Is not the
o; ct to prevent the payment of the interest
upon the new bonds? If the opposition
does not mean this it means nothing. The
funding law cannot be made an issue in
future contests unless the opponents of the
bill intend to advocate reputation openly.
Is not this what they are trying to prepare
the public sentiment of the State to sus-
tail? We do not believe they can do it,
in fac. we know they cannot. All the solid,
sub stantial men in the State, whether mer-
charts, manufacturers, farmers or mechan-
les, must oppose a policy which will be
ruiDoUs to all the financial interests of th )
Sac. Reputation TeUer pays either an
diUjdudIS or States. Away with all clap
trap about funding. Either boldly advO-
cate reputation, or drop the subjecs. The
8 Disguise is too thin. Two years ago, we
thought the time had not come to resume
a the payment of interest, but if we are not
nov sble, we never will be. If we permit
our Sac credit to be destroyed, we will
sink rather than rise in our pecuniary con.
dition. We, therefore, favor the payment
of the Interest on our debt in future, and
we believe the present rate of taxation,
. with q proper assessment, will do.