New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1882-08-31
Exchanging BONDS.

Ifthe method OF allotting the new three per cent
bonds is correctly stated in Washington dis
patches, Secretary Folger seems to lis to be
doing a serious injustice. Possibly it may not
yet be too late to adopt more fair ana more
reasonable method. The act authorizing the
issue of three per cent bonds provided that the
latest numbers of that issue should be the first
redeemed. The same provision had existed as
to the three and one-half per cents, which hold
ers were invited to surrender. As it was
deemed a highly valuable advantage to secure
bonds of early date and long life, persons
having 100000, 900 OF three and one-halt
per cents forwarded their applications at the
same hOur-the earliest named in the notice OF
the Secretary. These persons, then, were
all alike entitled to priority over all later
applicants, and the Secretary properly 80 pro-
vides. But as between these earliest appl-
cants, it is said, lie determines by lot. This
is essentially unjust, because it depriyes many
holders, without fault of their own, OF valn-
able advantage which they had previously
secured and held.
For illustration, X was tie holder OF the
very latest, and therefore least valuable, of
the bonds offered for exchange at 10 Il. NJ,
" ~
therefore most valuable, of the bonds offered
at that hour. They are $2OO,OOO,OOO apart II
debt is paid at the rate of SjO,OOO,OOO yearly
after taxes have been reduced by Congress-
these bonds are four years apart i'll length OF
life. The holder of the caller number came
Justly by his advantage when he was among
the earliest to surrender five per cents for three
and one-half per cents, and the Government
therefore OUGHT not to deprive him OF that
valuable advantage unrcasOnably or unneces-
sarily But Secretary FOlger casts lots, ahd IL
happens that y draws the very earliest and
therefore most valuable number OF the
5000, OOO.O 900 three per cents, while y draws
the very latest and therefore least valuable
number. BY pure chance, without justice on
either side X gets the advantage and the value
which A loses, and A becomes saddled with all
the disadvantage to which the hardness OF y
in applying for three and One-haf per cents
had subjected him. Both were on precisely
the same footing in the new application, and
deserve Just the same treatment from the GcV-
eminent namely, that their relative positions
and advantages with respect to each other
should not be altered. Yet the Government
takes away possible four years from the lie
of AS bond, and adds that possible four years
to the bond of "
This is so palpably unjust and unreasonable
that it causes, and is likely to cause, much COM
pant. Ii seems strange that the Secretary dd
not direct, if it was practicable, that Che rela-
tive position of the T2OO,OJO,OOO bonds offered
a. the same hour, is respects each other, should
be maintained without change in the number
tI..aft
5000, 900, 900 offered at the same hour would
then have, rs they should, priority in number
inc and longer life as against all bonds issued
to later applicants. But as respects each other,
the holders of these bonds would be enabled to
preserve each exactly that advantage to which
the nnmbering of his three and one half per cents
entitled him. If it is not too late, 1t would
certainly be well worth while for Secretary
Folgcr to adjust the numbering OF the new
bonds upon This principle.