The Leavenworth weekly times. [volume] (Leavenworth, Kan.) 1870-1880, 1878-12-12

The importance of early and decisive ac-
ton in the matter Of adjusting the public
debt which hangs over our county and city
is patent 10 every good citizen. We cannot
in justice TO ourselves passively permit the
obligation TO go on increasing from day to
day, and year after year with our inability
10 Iiqu!date in ,ull without seriously impair
ing our good name. While this question has
been a source of discussion among our people,
and there continues 10 be difference of OpIn-
ion regarding the best method or course to he
pu sued in relieving ourselves of the burden,
the fact remains that 1t must be met, and we
cannot afford longer to delay action in the
matter. The fact that the measure of pros
perity anticipated when the obligations
We're assumed, has not followed, argues no f.
nal relief or at least does not justifyus III
stu!tify!ns ourselves by ign-ring the obiiga-
tons. II we cannot effect an honorable COM
promise with the holders of our bonds,
one that Will not work serious hardship 10
our people. by the issuing of new bonds to
ruu twenty years at six per cent. interest, or
let them run thirty years if desired, we be
lieve the bond holders would be willing to
accept fifty cents on the dollar, and they
would encourage such compromise. We
urge then, the importance of instructing our
delegation TO have special enactment
passed at the approaching session Of the leg
islature, authorizing the board o: county
commissioners TO compromise all the bonded
Indebtedness OF the county on this basis.
This would be just, honorable, rea' enable
and right To do less would be dishOn orable.
We can present plausible and equitable rea-
sOrs or.such a compromise, but 10 say that
"twenty-five cents on The dollar is enough"
would be discreditable, dishonOrable, repu
diation commUnistIc. Let all bonds be
treat ed alike. The obligation is as binding
over one class as another.-PUtlic Press.
1t is Just and honorable for us to offer
our creditors fifty cents On the dollar.
Why is it "dishonorable" to offer to settle
at twenty-five cents on the dollar? II it is
"discreiitable," "dishoDorable," "repudia-
tion," "communlstic" to offer our creditors
twenty-five cents on the dollar, why is it
not discreditable, dishonest, reputation,
communistic, to offer them fifty cents?
The reply to the above can only be
found in the desire TO compromise upon
such terms IS will give per cent to
syndicate, and fee certain attorneys who
would fatten upon the commissions
made upon a compromise that would only
end in s.agnation and death to all the in
dustrial enterprises of our county.
A compromise effected on the basis Of
fifty cents on the dollar would not afford
the relief We need, would not make the
public burden bearable, and would not
bring the debt within the limits OF our abil-
ity to pay. The people believe that TWEEN
ty- i've cents on the dollar is all they can
afford, and they justly regard with suspic-
ion the parties who talk about such an Of
fer being dishonest" The simple question
is, Shall the bondholder accept the same
measure of depreciation in the value of his
property that obtains in all other kinds
OF property, or shall we see the life and
energy crushed out OF the entire city and |
county, and City thousand people COM
PEELED to sacrifice business, their
homes and their all, in fruitless attempt |
to comply with the letter OF An unju-t |
bond