The Dallas daily herald. [volume] (Dallas, Tex.) 1873-1887, 1881-11-18
The Confederate-Bond Craze

the ''lucky lunacy" of the revival of the
Confederate loans exhibits vitality fair
ly chargeable only to organization. In
that case it would be interesting to know
who is at the bottom Of the movement.
Something over fifteen years ago there was
a similar resurrection, and Secretary Sc
ward then gave to the press a list of alleged
holders of Confederate securities, which list
We believe he received from John Bigelow,
then minister to Paris The scan
dial and sensation caused by the pub
lication of that pseudo-otiicial list in both
England and the United States can
be imagined, or recalled, from the state
ment OF the fact that it included names sec
ond to no other among the nobility, the
government and the editors of Great Brit
ain. The alleged subscribers to what was
then sometimes called the Shareholders
loan, sometime the cotton loan" fairly
tum6led over one another in their anxiety
and haste to get their denials printed. Mr..
Gladstone easily extricated himself from a
position which for time seemed most en-
barrasSing and compromising for member
OF her majeSty'S ministry. Mr.. De-
lane, Of the London Times, was
prompt and explicit in his denials,
but even those who had all possible
confidence in his yeracity were staggered
by the fact that the long policy of the Times
its persistent depre cation of federal, secur-
ties and declarations that the position
finally assumed in the metaphorical last
ditch was impregnable-squared precisely
with what would have been his interest UNI
der the alleged circumstances. Mr.. Seward
nd Nv H. /. -
ed, and the list was mostly, mot entirely,
false.
A circular issued in the interest of he
new quotations is q most curious
and amusing document. That the
average Englishman is densely
ignorant of our affairs is sufficiently
well understood, but even those in the po-
sition of formers and leaders of public opin-
ION are often most amusingly wrong, even
whore selt-interest might be expected to
guide them to the right. 1t might be too
much to expect the holders of the bonds to
be infinitely informed as to how and why
the obligation to pay is so very defunct, but
surely It is not very extravaganza to expect
the leaders of the movement to be informed
on the rudimontary law governing the case.
Are they blind leaders of the blind, or do
they perfectly well know what they are
about? Certain it is that the circular in
question now before us, relies upon precise
~ the same grounds or hopes that so
far as we know, were last formulated on the
occasion of a once well-known, but now
generally forgotten, meeting of Confederate
bondh0lders at London Tavern in 1866, or
thereat out. The meeting resolved that the
great PRINCIPLES Of justice and international
law justified hope and expectation that the
United States and the states of the Con-
fedracy separately would honor the obliga-
ton. Similarly, the circular Of 1876 relies
upon the hope that the separate states will
pay the Confederaoy's debts after the
United States legislature has "annulled''
the decree which prevents the southern
states from recognizing their obliga-
tions even if they wished to do
So" That last phrase was never conceived
or written. in ignorance Of the quotations OF
the recognized debts of any one of half q
dozen states south OF Mason and Dixon
line
Itmay be supcrhous nut it is certainly
not irrelevant, to remark that the American
eagle is not a golden goose. What principle
otjustice or international law requires the
United States, more than any other nation
to pay the debts of its enemies? The cotton
loan was not originally contracted on the
creditof the, United,States; on the contrary
quite the reverse. And why should South
Carolina, for instance, pay even the mi.
nutest proportion of debt, even
if il wished to do so,m which
it never contracted? As to the
law Of the matter. we beg to assure all and
sundry--as they ought to know already
that the United States legislature has no
authority to annul any decree The
decree, thus vaguely referred to is not Il
law of congress, but the fourth section to
the fourteenth amendment to the constitu-
ton. Ii reads: "But neither the United
States nor any state shall assume or pay
any debt or obligation incurred in aid of in
surrection or rebellion against the United
States. All such debts, obiga-
tlons and claims shall be held illegal al d
void Gibraltar may be captured by force
or gold, but the fourteenth constitutional
amendment is impregnable.
Still another EXPLANATION Of the liveli.
ness OF this corpse comes from Washington.
II Is said that there is on deposit in the
Bank of England some seventeen-odd mil
lions OF Confederate gold which will be sur
rendered to the bondholders. IL there is
any such deposit 1t belongs to the United
States, both according to the articles of sur.
render and according to English law A
precisely similar question has already been
Irrigated in England, the bone of contention
being the title to Confederate cot.
ton. Nothing could be moro In
point or more explicit than
the decision of Vice Chancellor
Wood in the Priolear case, and we beg 10
refer readers of the circular under com.
ment to the Chancellor's words In the
English reports For the purposes OF