The Daily clarion. [volume] (Jackson, Miss.) 1866-1888, 1878-01-08

In this, that Mississippi never received
cent of the money for which her faith
was alleged to have been pledged; but
not SO with the other States and nation
alities. The Richmond Despatch in its
violent TRADE, quotes Mr.. Prentiss as say
ing that the anti-bond paying people of
Mississippi based their action upon the
principle that one generation hasno right
to bind another. This is old Virginia
doctrine enunciated by Thomas Jeffer-
son, the apostle of political freedom
and father of Democratic Republican
government on this continent; but
whether abstractly true, or false, it is not
the ground, as we have shown, upon which
the people of Mississippi stood with refer
ence to the claim of the holders of the
Union Bank bonds. .QH s s.sa
A few instances of reputation of
public debts by States and Nations will
not be out of place in this connectio n.
They will serve to show that if there be
abroad censorious people who are dis
| posed to point the finger of scorn at Mis-
sissippi, it will be the repetition of the
old story of the self-righteous hypocrite
who did not see the mote in his own eye
in his anxiety to discover the beam in his
neighbor's. In England, under Henry
| VIII, Parliament (Hallam Con. History,
p. 25,) "freely, literally and absolutely
"granted unto the Kings Highness, all
sums of money which were due him
on any and every ''promise, bond or OBJ
legation" This was wholesale repudia-
ton. In little more than generation
afterwards Parliament passed another
| population act of a similar kind.
Charles III, defrauded the creditors of
the Nation out of s2,2OO,OOO. France
has repudiated repeatedly. Coming
nearer home, Massachusetts, in 1749, re-
deemed her public debt of 1900, 900
pounds by paying one-twelfth of it.
After the revolution, Virginia settled her
debt by funding it at the rate of one dol
lar for one thousand. The "public
debt which is alleged to shave bought
our liberties" in the revolutionary strug-
gle, was entirely repudiated We have
spoken of ancient Virginia. The mod
ern Virginia is now considering, not
whether she will "scale" her present debt,
but how much of it she will repudiate.
The Tennessee Legislature has just ad-
journed without settling the public debt
of the State at what the creditors agreed
to take, viz fifty cents on the dollar, be-
cause the two houses failed to agree upon
the interest it should hereafter draw,
whether four per cent. or six per cent. per
annum. Neither party in Louisiana
dreams of paying the debt of that State
at more than sixty. cents on the dollar !;
and we infer from the reluctance with
which the question is touched by the
present administration, that the creditors
will be rejoiced when they realize fifty
cents on the dollar for their claim. The
examples might be extended ad infnitum,
but we must content ourselves with the
case of Minnesota. Look at her repudi-
alton. Her railroads borrowed money to
construct their lines. The State Endorsed
their bonds, and all went we'll for a sea-
son. The bonds fell due, and the rail-
roads could not, or would not, pay. The
State bid in the roads, and took possession
of the property, but paid nothing. The
creditors took the case to the United
States Supreme Court, and obtained a
i decision to the effect that the railroad
company was out of the case, but the
State ,cas in equity bound to meet the debt.
The whole question was submitted TO the
people. The bondholders were ready to
take fifty cents on the dollar. The people
voted, by tremendous majority, to pay
nothing at all :!
| Talk about reputation Has not the
Government of the United States in two
notable instances authorized the whole ma.
ton of individuals to repudiate their
debts-wipe them out as with sponge
by 'staking," in what is known in ordina-
ry parlance. "the benefit of the bankrupt
law" without reference to the equity OF
i legality of the obligations thus cancelled:
!. What is the difference in morals between
State granting authority to individuals
to repudiate their debts under the form
Iof bankruptcy, and awaiting itself of the
same privilege in her capacity as sover
eign power9 In former times it was the
custom of Great Britain when she exer