The Morristown gazette. [volume] (Morristown, Tenn.) 1867-1920, 1880-04-21
HON JORDON STOKES ON THE
STATE DEBT.

STATE DEBIT
We have heretofore acknowledged
the reception of pamphlet on the
State debt written by Hon. JOrdon
Stokes, of Lebanon. AS an argu.
ment it will add much to the well es-
tablished reputation of Col. Stokes
as a iurist. 1t is an exhaustive, dis:
passionate history and review of the
whole question and wholly from a
legal point. The validity of the
State debt is shown by memorable
logic, and will carry conviction to
the mind of any one who reads it
with a mind not wholly clouded by
prejudice or ignorance. Col. Stokes
has done the State a great service.
We regret that we are not able to
reprint the entire pamphlet, and
must content ourselves with an ex'
tract from the introducing chapter :
Recent discussion of the State debt of
Tennessee, and the result of the popular
vote of her people, have awakened new
and deep interest in the minds of honest
and thoughtful men all over the country.
Perhaps no proposition more startling
was ever conceived in the wild dreams
of Utopian theorists, much less embodied
in a solemn enactment of a legislative
body, than that of the compromise meas
ure recently submitted to the people and
voted down by large majority. Had
1t been a proposition to create new
debt or incur additional liability, how
ever obnoxious it might have been to
objection on the score of sound policy
and expediency, it would not have been
in conflict with the intrinsic or acquired
rights Of any class OF persons. AS the
voters are in the main the Taxpayers
who have such debt to pay, it would
have had, to say the least, the appear
ance of justice and fair dealing in its
favor. But to submit Il proposition IN
vOlving necessarily the questions of both
the validity and payment of an existing
debt to a vote of the people, who are
debtors, constitutes a moral and legal
absurdity that has no example or parallel
in any enlightened country outside the
States of the Unien. AS principle, it
strikes at the very foundation of honor
and good faith in the public and private |
dealings of men; as a precedent, it tends
20 the destruction of Independent and |
useful legislation In future. 1t violates
the fundamental rule that no man shall |
sit in judgment on his own case; it ig- |
nores a central thought "lead US not into |
temptation" in the great prayer of the
Redeemer of mankind. No doubt the |
worthy authors of the measure intended |
to honor and fatter the pride of the peO-
pie, and perhaps to divert attention from
their own want of courage and manhood
to do their duty; but no body of men
have the moral right to force upon
people, pressed down with the losses of
life and property incident to a recent
and terrible civil war, an issue in the
Of which they must weigh
as in a balance their pecuniary interest
rs taxpayers on the one side, against
their honor and integrity as honest deb
tors on the other. Whatever may be the
motives of its authors, praiseworthy or
the evils of the measure will
be seen and felt for an indefinite num-
Der of years ia the corruption of public
md private morals, and in the compare
i've suspension of progress and develop I
nent in the material interests and re-
sources of the State.