The daily gazette., 1881-01-10
moNDAY. JANUARY .. Issl.

THREE PER CBNTs.--The Fundin
Bill was beto-e The House of Represents
tives on Saturday all day. The discus
sion must have been very inrerestin
one !; but so little Of it has been allowe
10 come before the public at this writin
that one Is not able to form ma ur
opinion of the speeches. The N. Y
World gave brief synopsis of it In
letter yesterday, but the Herald did no
even mention it. The conclusion of the
days work was that issue of a higher
rate than 3 per cent. bond could moi
pass the House, and that the majorit,
was largely In favor Of that rate. The
real question was as 10 the time the
bonds we're to run. Mr.. Wood was
present and led the debate; but made
no set speech, merely moving 10 correcI
the rate in the bill from 81 to 3 pei
cent. bonds. Many speeches Were
made; but the most practical and com
mon sense one was by Speaker Randall.
Wood, Claain, Eyre, Krifer and Kelley
had spoken when the Speaker took the
floor in favor of fixing the rate at pei
cent. Mr.. Randall thought bonds could
be popularized at that rate by maxine
National Banks agents for their sale
and abolishing syndicaies. He favored
2-10 certificates and per cent. fifteen
year bonds. MIR. Wood agreed will
MIR. Randall, and produced letter from
Fisk & Hatch declaring The practicabilty
OF floating three per cent. bonds. Mr..
Wood thought the plan of certificates to
run not over six or eight years and bonds
for fifteen years would be entirely prac-
ticable, both at per cent. Shortly after
this MIR. Bayne, of Pennsylvania, sub
misted his amendment authorizing th,
Secretary Of the Treasury to refund al
the lowest rate possible, but not exceed.
ing per cent. Mr.. Converse, of Ohio
spoke upon this amendment. He said
nothing could so help the agricultural
classes as the issue of 3 per cent. bonds.
That when the Government was payin,
oper cert. s and 10 per cent were DE-
manded on mortgages; that when tbe
Government reduced to per cent. tn,
rate on mortgages fell to and PEI
cent, and that further reduction BY
the Government would be of more bene-
ut to that class of people than all the
contemplated savings suggested by Other
plans.
Mr.. Bayne's amendment was lost by
an overw helning vote on which h,
asked no division. Then Mr.. New
berry suggested the issue of $3.50, 10000
In ten-thirty bonds at per cent. Mi
Newberry is the richest member OF
the House and is promptly identified
with large business interests in the
Northwest. He said that those inter
ests were favorable to the issue of three
per cent. bonds.
Mr.. Hurd then delivered an able
speech but he favored per cent. bonds,
and did not believe short serm bonds
could be negotiated al per cent. He was
evidently in the interest OF the banks
and brokers, the first of whom wan.
high interest and the latter long tenn
bonds because it extends their trade
Just so much, while a short term cur.
tails the brokerage business. Mr.. Husd
said there was only $l4,000,000 due aud
that he would pay a. once. The $780, |
10000 were only payable at the option
OF the Government in July, and he pre- |
ferred not to refund at all and pay tie
8 and 6 per cent. as the Surplus accrued,
rather thah make a long term bond al
3 per ceAG.
From Saturdays debate it is clear
that large majority of the members
were opposed to higher raLe than pei
cent. But the fear is that all the House
does will be destroyed in The Senate.
1t is here that the corporation attorneys
mako their mark-it is here where ever,
species of progressive ecouomy is clog
ged and taxes are heaped upon anu
held upon the people. The House ol
Commons has an influence before which
the House OF Lords in nine cases out o.
ten, on great questions, bow gracefully.
Not SO with our aristocratic Senate.