Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1874-07-12

]
e member Of congress:
I FELLOw~CITIZENs-In appearin sote-
fore you to-day to address you upDn
questions Of mOmentOus interest, ap-
pear not as a candidate, not as one hav-
ing any expectation or desire Of holding
office, but as s private citizen feeling a
: deep interest in the welfare of the State
where 1 live and where I expect to d e.
In common with you l feel a lively in
terest in whatever concerns the general
J good and the fair name OF our State. 1t
, is too often the case that politicians,
office-holders and Office-seekers are the
only men who address the people upon
: political questions. That am not one
Of these is evinced by the fact that l
F have not been candidate for more than
twenty years, and that after having gserv d
I the county in which | then lived
(Maury) one session in the legislature. L
J voluntarily abandoned political life.
, But now is q time in the history of cur
State when every man should freely
utter his sentiments and not leave the
discussion Of political questions TO pro
fessed politicians only. Whilst [ am
not a politician in any sense of the
word, ] am and expect to be q member
Of party. In republican governments
there must and will be parties. The
only safe plan is to select the party whii:h
you believe to be best and to represent
the most correct principles. There is no
such thing as entire Independence of
party. When you hear men declaiming
against parties they are generally at
tempting TO form 7leW party, repre-
senting themselves and their peculiar
views. 1 am a member of the Demo-
10 7 a. 5,g,Fv I
the word Democratic-that party as it
existed before the war. The present
Democratic party is composed Of former
Wings and former Democrats, in fact, of
all who are opposed to the Republican
party as represented by General Grant.
1 shall use no offensive terms and iD-
dulge in no offensive language, because
l wish to discuss great questions upon
/ their merits.
WHAT THE DEMOCRATIC PARTY BIAS
DONE.
My object is to show what the Demo
cratic party has done for Tennessee since
that party came into power, and this l
/ propose to do, not by mere assertions,
/ but by giving facts and figures, drawn
1 from official snd reliable sources. The
( Democratic party Of Tennessee has hs.d
I possession Of the State government only
/ five years, and during that time it has
/ greatly reduced the State debt; !. it has re-
/ sumed the payment Of interest on the
/ bonds, and II hss atthe same time given
( US lower State taxes than in nine-tentas
/ OF the States Of the Union. My object
/ is not only TO vindicate the Democratic
| party Of Tennessee, but to vindicate the
party itself, from the many unjust and
damaging representations which have
been made, and which are calculated TO
do her great injustice, and to make her
people dissatisfied.
WHAT PARTY Is RESPONSIBLE FOR THE
DEBT.
The Democratic party is not responai-
bic for the present debt Of the State.
The amount of bonds issued TO railroad
companies from 1865 to 1859 was SIS, ,29I,-
600, and yet how few roads were built,
With the exception Of the Northwestern,
the Tennessee and Pacific, which is only
thirty miles in length, and 8 few short
roads in East Tennessee, there are scarce
" any. ILs whole debt Of the Stste
up to January lst, 1871, was S43, $685. lis.
It has since been reduced to S26 000 900, |
four million Of which is secured by solv-
ent railroads, not including the
school fund. The debt may even he,
and, perhaps, is, less than il is here esti- |
mated. 1t is not for me to censure the
administration of the State government
from 1865 to 1859. They were labOring
under peculiar difficulties; the whole
railroad system Of the State had been
destroyed, or very much injured by the
war, and something had to be done. 1
am merely stating facts, to determine
upon Whist party the rsspOnsi bility for
the creation of this debt rests. It is
early not upon the Democratic party.
The railroad debt in 1861 was sic, ,2I, 900,
and in 1871 it was S37, ,23S, ,072.
ILLEGAL BONDS.
1t is sometimes said that many bonds
were illegally and fraudulently, or, at
least, imprudently and recklessly' is
sued. 1t is not my purpose now to say
whether they We're or not; my object,
as before stated, is to show that the
Democratic party is not responsible for
the debt. The legislature which met in
1863 was composed Of a majority of
Conservatives, and that legislature re-
cognized the binding force Of most of
the bonds that had been issued during
the BrOWnloW and Senter administrs- |
tiOns. They virtually confirmed and /
ratified the bonds that had been issued /
since the war, except very few. Then /
was the time, II ever, when The illegitli- |
ty Of these bonds shOuld have been test |
ed but " are precluded, by the action /
of that Conservative legislature, from /
raising the question az this time. II, |
however, We could raise it, no good |
would result, because these bonds. about |
which there were doubts, have all been
returned into the state treasury by the
railroad companies, under an act passed
by the legislature Of 1869, With the ex-
ception OF 81, 800, 900. The following ia
bic speaks for itself:
No. bonds No. bonds
Received. in Treaty.
and Pacific
railroad. d.....--.............. S,l55Cg0 Sl0S9 900
Southern rRilrOad......- 523,00J az 0O0
East Tenn. and West
eu North Carolina. 10000 18000
s. 203s.OoO sl,s9O0O
Having paid the bonds about which
there was some doubt, how can we now
refuse to pay bonds about the validity Of
which there never was any doubt? E,ut
even if there were illegal bonds ont
standing now, would paying three per
cent. interest on all bonds remedy the
evil? Would we pay the holders Of
bonds said to be illegal as much as we
would the holders Of bonds admitted TO
be legal? This is the difficulty Ia which
those.who propose to pay three per cent.
interest get themselves.
CHEAPLY BOUGHT BONDS.
1t is sometimes said that many Of the
bonds were bought at low rates, aud
therefore we should not pay more than
three per cent. interest upon our bonded
debt. Then the same difficulty again
arises. How can we ascertain how
much each bOndholder paid for his
bond? lSoIle Of the bonds have been
held for years, and were originally pir-
chased by the present holders from the
State at fair rates. Many Of them are
held by benevolent and educational n
stitutions, and many by widows and
orphans who trusted TO the honor and
good faith Of the State. What rigat.
let me AJAX, has a State, any more than
an individual, when the deuTeciation ia
its bonds has been caused by its failure
to pay the interest for years, and ever to
pay bonds which have been for some
time-due, to say that she will not here
after pay the interest, because the bonds
have been sold for less than their mar
value. This would be 10 take advantage
of her own wrong. II the State shoiifd
propose to pay the bonds at this tirae.
there would be more excuse for wishing
to pay only what they cost the holders;
but when the proposition is to get an
extension Of time, with what show of
justice can the holders be asked TO take
only three per gent. INTEREST," Disguise
it as we may, this is simply reputation
Of the debt, and will bring with it all
the evils Of reputation.
A PERMANENT DEBT.
There are those who say we do not wish
10 repudiate any part Of the debt; out
we are now IN such condition that we
can only pay three per cent. interest,
and we will let the remaining three per
cent. lie over until we get better able 10
pay il. This would be impracticallle.
How can we pay three per cent. inter
est when the coupons are for six per
cent? VIII we psy some and not IIay
others, or will we pay half Of each cpn-
POM Who would determine these
questions? How could we make dis