Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1878-01-26

coupons SnOuids ROl DC receivable Tor I
taxes. The Phelan bill was thus
adopted in lieu of the Frierson bill,
and without putting the Phelan bill
on its third reading, the House adj
iourned sine die, without ever taking
vote on the question.
For the truth of the foregoing facts
we refer to the official journals of
the Legislature, and we defy con-
tradiction from anyone. Besides
which, the senior editor of this pa
per was an officer of the Senate, and
was personally present during the
late extra session of the Legislature;
and we state as fact to which we
were an eyewitness, that Mr.. Gar
ner labOred hard and earnestly to
effect a compromise of the State
debt, and that the Senate bill was
the only bill that would have passed
that body. And we have it from
high authority that the bondholders
would have accepted its provisions
and funded under it.
Now did Mr.. Garner defeat the
compromise. Did not the Chroni-
cle's friends defeat it? Who will
the people regard rs their friend?
Is it the man who asserted that the
people were honest, and would stand
by the settlement the Legislature
made? Or the man who (by his
acts) said that they We're dishonest,
and we must handcuff them for all
time to come, for fear that they will
not stand by the settlement? We
suggest to the Chronicle that the
people have not too many friends,
and it is bad policy to attempt to
murder what few they have left up
on baseleSs accusations. When the
people of this Senatorial District
Shall have understood the position
and votes of Senator Garner upon
this question they may differ Very
widely with the Chronicle and its
friends. Now if Reputation shall
come, certainly the conservative ell
ement with which Mr.. Garner acted
will not be responsible for it? Can
the Chronicle and its friends escape
the responsibility?
Will the Chronicle have the fair
ness to publish this article in its col
umns, in order that its readers may
have the real facts as to this matter?
We give the Senator's own state
ment in full, and we will give him
the further advantage of acknOwl-
edging our error in stating that the
FriersOn bill came up from the
House instead of originating in the
Senate, and will now add, that error
corrected, Mr.. Garner's amendment
stands exactly where it did in our
estimation as having killed the COM
promise bill by causing its authors to
lose their interest in it as being no
longer a fair acceptance of the bond
holders proffered compromise.
And now we viii very briefly dis
cuss the merits Of Mr.. Gamers
amendment. He speaks of the pro-
posal to receive the coupons in pay
ment of taxes as Il mortgaging Of
the property and labor of the people,
as making the bOndholders preferred
creditors, and as giving them the
right to file a bill in the Federal
Courts to compel the Legislature to
raise a tax, etc. 1t does none of
these things; it simply places them
upon the level of all other creditors.
Other creditors have the right to
balance the States claims against
them; a Comptroller's warrant is
receivable for taxes, and why not Il
coupon for interest on a bond which
is Just as much a debt as the warrant.
What other debt i there, public
or private, in which the just claims
of both parties are not allowed as a
set-Off the one against the other :
Where is the mortgage in this ?
Where is the preference? and what
standing does it give the public cred
itor in the Federal Courts which he
has not now? The truth Is that the
acceptability Of the coupons fortaXes
is only q grievance against the peO-
pie on the suppositiOn that their in
tention is agree to the communication
of their debt for half the face of it.,
with the proviS0 that they intend
no more to raise funds to pay the
interest on this half debt than they
did on the whole one; on any other
hypothesis it is no grievance at all.
Ii Mr.. &. chooses to accept this by
pOthesis, then ne has nothing to do
but openly to take his seat among
the regulators. and a paragraph
that his champion advances against
the Tobacco Leaf with whom, as
with ourselves, he i in controversy
looks very much that way, for he
says:
But, if that coupon feature had
been enacted into a law, then this
right of the people would have
been very materially leSsened and
abridged; for the bOndhOldeTs would
then have been made prettrged cred
itOrs, and about $40, 600 annually to
pay the interest to the bOndhOlders
would be Wrung from the people in
the shape of taxes, besides soc, 900
that it takes To run the State Gov
eminent.
Well! did you expect to issue the
new bonds without paying the in
tereSt on them? If not, all that
talk goes for nothing at all A; you
are in favor of raising the $7i0,000
for interest as much "a we are; if
you did, then in what sense are you
a State credit man? Which horn
do you take?
Aa for that trash about peoples
friends," il Is just on a par with the
wretched Tepudiating slang which
calls a man the peoples enemy if he
advises them to pay their debts, and
themselves the peoples friends for
advising them to dodge those debts
by any pettifogging stratagem that
may present isself.
We have concluded to ler Colonel