Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1876-06-17
REPUTATION AND STATE RIGHTS.

REPUTATION AND STATE RIGHTS.
In the columns of the McMlnnville
New Era, we have before us a speech
delivered by the Hon. Albert s. Marks
in Manchester, on the subject of our
State Finances. It is not our purpose
to 60 into the main subject of his dis
course, which is the proposal of
State Bank as the mode of extrication
from our financial troubles. We have
already given our views on the i'm
practicability of that policy and the
details with which Mr.. Marks enters
as to the mode of raising capital for
the purpose strongly confirm us in that
impression. This part of the question
however we must dismiss for the pres
ent, as we desire to say something on
a deeply important topic suggested by
two different points made in this
speech. These two points we place
now in juxtaposition, our own may be
considered as lying at the apex of that
angle towards which these two con-
verging lines of thought conduct us
Point LIST. The great loss of power
in asserting themselves which State
Rights have sustained since the late
war.
Point End. The assertion of State
sovereignty as bar to all opposition.
should the State government decline
to meet its bonded indebtedness.
Our own Point. The doctrine of
State Rights has not the strength in
these latter days to stand the strain
proposed to be put upon it.
There is our text: we hope that our
sermon will not be much longer. We
will premise that ever since we first
began the study of American politics.
and that is now thirty-ive years ago,
we have been devotee of State Rights
according to the straitest sect of Cal
houn Democrats: we wish to preserve
the little that is left of them and do
not, therefore, desire to see them sub
jected to test we are sure they could
not bear.
On the first point there is no differ
ence whatever between Judge Marks
and ourselves. There has not been a
point in controversy since the close of
the war in which the defensive party
has pleaded State Rights or State Sow
ereignty in bar of Federal aggression
wherein the former has not been found
utterly incompetent to help itself ::
Judge Marks has illustrated this point
with much force in the instance of the
national banks, he has shown that their
establishment involveda double viola
ton of the constitution, First in the
establishment of banks in any State by
Federal authority, and Second the pro-
hibiting the establishment of State
banks. This is only one out of many
instances of aggression which show
that State Rights have been stretched
in the present day till their powers of
resistance are as thin as the parchment
on which they are written-we recog-
Mise the fact but are powerless to find
the remedy. 1t is true, Judge Nj. tim
idly suggests the Supreme court, which
however he shows to have been already
packed for quite an opposite purpose.
That for our first point-State Rights
have been reduced to a State verging
upon hamilton.
Point End. Weak as it has been
found the Judge proposes to interpose
it against all aggrieved parties who
may be injured by reputation or its
equivalent the suspension of interest
on our bonds. We will here state his
position in his own words.
Il wish to impress upon you that the
people have but one inducement to
provide for their debt and that is the
obligation of honor. State and nation
struggle to maintain their credit in or
der to be able to borrow, but our peo-
pie have no such incentive they do not
expect to borrow in future, they are
working to no such contingency.
This is plainly the same advice to
the people as we have so often protest
ed against, you are Sovereign State
and can't be sued and therefore it is
a point of honor with you" and lit
tie further on he says:
Our misfortunes have made it i'm
possible in my opinion to meet the in
terest on our debt by taxation. l do
not believe our people can or will sub
NIT to it.
That brings it to the measure of a
nutshell and his argument is, You
can't be made to pay it, it is therefore
debt of honor; therefore you need
not pay it unless you like-and l don't
think you like"
The most dangerous advice we have
ever known to be given to the people
of Tennessee. If all depends upon
the first proposition, you can't be
made to pay" But then this very pro-
position depends upon the assertion of
State Sovereignty, which has already
been shown by the Judge himself to
have become powerless to resist any
aggression whatever.
Is this the advice of thinking
statesman or that of pettifogging at
torney?
Our own belief is that, so put for
ward, the last vestige of State Rights
would be obliterated from our Consti-
tuition.