The Republican journal. [volume] (Belfast, Me.) 1829-current, 1881-09-29
The Refunding Movement.

The communications from "Fair Play"
and ''TaX Payer" and the card of Mayor
Woodcock, recently published have sup
piled all the data necessary to a thorough
understanding of the refunding question.
No one who has read these articles closely
need be at a loss upon whom to place the
responsibility for the present deadlock
What has been said concerning the rea-
tiOns between the city and the railroad
company, though interesting is not spe-
cially important at this time. We know
OF no reason why this matter should have
been brought into the controversy unless
to arouse a feeling sure to embarrass if
not defeat the proposed retunding of the
clty's Indebtedness. ''TaX Payer" ar
raigned the preferred stockholders of the
railroad for series of acts alleged To be
preludlclal to the interests Of the city and
on this groundopposed the placing of the
city's railroad stock in the hands of trus-
''Fair Play has shown conclusyely that
the acts complained of were those of the
city authorities and that they were ratified
by the popular vote. This explanation
furnishes the strongest possible argument
in favor Of the plan for reiunding first
proposed, and against using the city's in
terest in the railroad us a football in each
succeeding spring election. But for the
issue raised by Tax Payer and his asso-
ciates retunding would now be in pro
grcss. Delays are dangerous, and it is
doubtful if the work could now be begun
and carried out with such assured pros
poets of success as before this controversy
arose. The real taxpayers, those who
have the welfare of the city at heart,
have, we think, good cause for complaint
against those who have DELAYED. if not de
teated, the retundlng movement. The plea
upon which this has been done has no
weight whatever. The citv's intcrests are
as safe in the hands of trustees, properly
instructed, as they would be in the hands
of a city government chosen at the next
or any future election; while security
subject to the popular vote each year
would be no security at all in the estima-
ton of any capitalist or bank in this or
any other country. The course advocated
by Tax Payer is fifty illustrated by the
fable in which dog crossing stream
with Il piece of meat in his mouth sees
the reflection of the meat in the water
Dropping the substance he attempts to
seize the shadow and 50 loses his dinner.
The attacks made upon our local banks
are both unjust and unwisu Perhaps
when we reach the utopian era pictured
by dcmdgogueS such institutions as banks
will be unknown; but ut present their
usefulness is 50 evident as to call for no
argument in their behalf. The Very PEG
pie who now denounce the banks for not
loaning money on insufficient security
would be foremost in abuse of the bank
officers, If. through accepting such secur-
ity, the money Of depOsltors should be
lost. These ,t1cers. as the custodians of
private and corporation funds, are re
sponsible TO their depositors, and no one
could wish their trusts less sacrcdlv re
garded. The fact that the banks refused
To take amy of the original railroad bonds,
50 far from rejecting upon them, is very
much to their credit. The history of
ninety out of every one hundred
railroad enterprises in this country shows
that the original subscribers have lost
every cent invested. Railroad enterprises,
with rare exceptions, are speculative, and
no we'll conducted bank engages in spec
ulations. To regard bank as 4 close
corporation, having interests apart from
which it is established, is popular error,
tostered by INSCRIPTIONS persons to fur
ther their own ends. Such bank would
soon find its occupation gone In point
Of fact the great bulk of the capital con
trolled by the banks is furnished by the
depositors, and it is by investing their
funds that the banks are enabled to pay
interest on their deposits.
But admitting, for arguments sake, the
truth of all that has or can be said against
the banks, is it not asking rather too
much to ask the public to believe that
these institutions would deliberately sac
ritice their own interests, without the
slightest apparent or conceivable motive
for 50 doing. 1t is no secret that both of
our banks have, or control, money seek
ing investment. If they buy government
four per cent. bonds they must pay for
them q premium of from Ii to IL per
cent.-equivalent to the loss of four years
interest. Would they not gladly then
take our proposed city four per cents. at
par, II the security was satisfactory
Ana II they now hold government four
per cents, they could dispose of them and
by investing the proceeds in the city bonds
realize nearly five per cent. per annum
instead of four as now or they might add
the premium of l6 to II per cent to
their cash resources and still draw four
per cent. on their bonds. To suppose
that the banks would forego these sub
stantial advantages without good cause
is the height of absurdity. They only
ask that the security shall be sufficient,
and this is Il request they have the right
to make, and which it is their duty to
make; and which is or should be a CON
dition precedent to the investment of
funds held by them.
If, as has been shown, it is for the in