Nashville union and American. [volume] (Nashville, Tenn.) 1868-1875, 1875-03-21
THE BILL TO REPEAL THE FUND.
ING LAW

A mere br1gt1rn1 fisInen, recalling the
traditional bull against the comet, was
the supreme effort Of the House last
Wednesday to repeal the funding law
By a legislative "rider" on third read
ing. If enacted into a law, it would
not IN the least affect the status Of the
twenty-five million dollars Of bonds al
ready funded or registered, and its
whole vengeful force would be expend-
ed on the two millions which have not
yet come IN, but which the State owes
all the same, whether they come in this
year or next. But themanner inwhich
this proposed repeal was attempted, is
clearly unconstitutional, and de-
serves some passing notice as a
signal instance of the party
and crude legislation which the trainers
IF our new Constitution sought to pre-
vent. That instrument provides that
"every bill shall be read once on three
different days, and be passed each
time In the house where it originated
before transmission to the other" It
is further provided that the subject of
each bill shall ''be expressed in the
title" The House bill IN question
passed two readings under a title de-
claring its subject to be the eleventh
section only of the funding law. On
the third reading, presto, change, and
1t is made to apply to the whole law.
Il this were a mere amplifcation or
enlargement Of the subject, its pro-
priety would be questionable, but it
involves more than that. The eleventh
section happens to be of such a nature
and bearing, that the funding law Of
1873 would have been complete
without it. While the body Of the law
related to debts past due, the section
in question looked to the future and
anticipates the contingency Of further
legislation. This distinction is evident
to the hastiest reader Of its language:
Sec. II. Be 1t further enacted, that
the bonds that may fall due between
the LIST day Of July, 1874, and the lst
day Of July, 1884, shall be fuHdaBle at
the option Of the State In bonds, au-
thorized by the first section of this
act.
This section, it viii be seen, relates
altogether to debts maturing in the
next ten years. 1t does not say such
debts shall be funded, but
merely that they may or may
not be funded sat the option of the
State" Ii evidently anticipates ac-
ton by succeeding Legislatures if the
State determines not to fund, for such
"option of the State" could not be as
certained nor made known except
through the Legislative body. There
fore, The introduction Of a bill entitled
TO repeal the eleventh section Of the
Funding law" so far from indicating a
repeal Of the whole law, was perfectly
consonant with the Fanding law as
piece Of legislation that the law itself
anticipated Eat the option Of the
State To pass a bill on two readings
under this innocent, unaUspicious title,
and then on third reading to make it
apply to a subject that could not have
been anticipated from its title, Is exact
" the sort Of vicious legislation
against which the Eew CCnstitu-
ton so Pointedly provides. To repeal
section eleven. was 70 deal with debts
maturing within the coming ten years;
to repeal the whole funding law was to
bring IN different subiect-matter, name
ly, the past due bonds and coupons that
have not yet been presented for fund
ing, and such other outstanding bonds
as are not registered. IF this kind Of
q ''rider" can be tackled On bill during
third reading, then all our constitution
al checks requiring that a bill be read
three times on three different days IN
each house, and that its s1biect-mat-
ter shall be distinctly expressed in
the title, 90 for naught. Some action
on the eleventh section might have
been expected Of this Legislature, mas
much as nearly fifty thousand dollars
in bonds fall due during this year and
next. But to repeal the entire fund
ing law would be a blind blow at the
foreign holders Of some two million
dollars of State debt, merely because
it has not yet been presented at the
State Treasury under the Law. 1t
would vainly strike at the most innO-
cent class Of holders, for the gamblers
and spectators were the first to fund !
and register. As an effort to punish |
any supposed funding ring, it would |
FIRE completely over their heads and |
strike innocent parties. Meanwhile |
the obligations Of the State remain
precisely the same.