Clarksville weekly chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1873-1890, 1882-01-21
EDrroRs CHRONICLE: Knowing the

suggestions upon a subject that has
been before the people of Tennessee
for long time, and that promises to
occupy much of the public time and
attention this year.
Seven years ago the CHRONICLE first
took up the cudgeis in the State debt
fight, and it advocated then the payment
of the entire debt, principal and inter
est, in accordance with the provisions
of the funding bill that had just passed
both houses of a Democratic Legisla-
ture and become a law. In that effort
to prevent the State from repudiating
any part of her Indebtedness, was an
active supporter of the CHRONICLE, and
through its columns I endeavored to
show that with her then debt of about
nineteen millions, as appeared from
the Comptroller's reports, with taxable
property assessed at more than three
hundred millions, exclusive of rail-
roads, which were estimated by her
Governor at seventy-five millions more'
with her apparently rapidly increasing
wealth, and above all with the volun-
tary promise to meet all her obliga-
tions fresh from the lips of her recently
emancipated people, Tennessee ought
to exert herself and strive if possible
to pay every cent of what she owed.
took this position then because |
believed she could meet her obliga-
tons, though not of course without
some sacrifice, and because all the pro-
visions of the funding bill had been
discussed before the peopleo of the State
in the canvas of 1872, and Gov. Brown
and Democratic Legislature had been
elected upon this issue. The creditors
had come forward and taken their new
bonds without one word of protest
from any part of the State, believing
and having good right to believe, that
our people were all satisfied with the
law. And 1 thought we ought to make
at least one honorable effort to uphold
a measure to which, as / considered, we
all stood pledged.
Again as a matter of State pride and
as a matter Of principle, desired that
we should if possible comply with our
contracts to the letter, and not be COM
PEELED to resort at all to compromise
with our creditors.
! 1t is sad hour for honest individu-
ais or honest communities when they
are compelled to say to their creditors
eve cannot keep our word to you; you
have our notes, but we cannot comply
with our promise to pay but when
ever an individual or community is
| forced to this extremity, when the
creditor is notified that his claim can
not be paid in full, that compromise
is necessary, all else becomes a matter
of calculation; it is still the duty of the
debtor to pay what he can, but only
facts and figures can show how much
that is, and if the debtor be a State
every good citizen will wish to be
carefully informed as to her revenues
before he arrives at conclusion as to
what would and what would not be a
| Just settlement.
In 1874, Tennessee was proudly
striving to pay her entire debt. Wisely
or unwisely, she gave up the fight, and
the question since then has been, how
much Of it should she pay? Over that
question many weariso1iiie discussions
hare been held. and now we stand face
to face with another funding bill, which
proposes to settle it forever.
make no point upon this bill that
it is a Republican measure, the work
of a party which is in a minority in
the State, and whose strength in the
Legislature was due solely to division
in the Democratic ranks. | shall not
dwell upon the charges of fraud and
corruption so freely brought against
some OF the members who supported
it. shall not stop to enquire whether
Democratic members who voted for it
did or did not violate their pledges to
their constituents.
l shall address myself solely to the
enquiry as to whether the settlement
proposed is in itself Il fair and proper
one, and one that ought-these other
things being out of the way-tO be
acceptable to the people of Tennessee.
| do this now without waiting for
the decision of the injunction bill in
the Supreme Court, first, because
have not the slightest doubt as to what
that decision will be; and second, be-
cause l cannot see what the court has
to do with a question which we must
settle for ourselves in the next canvas.
| presume the court will hold that this
new funding bill having passed its
third reading in each house, and hay
ing received the signature of the Gov
ernOr and the great seal of the State,
has all the forms oil law and must be
treated and respected as such. If that
be so it will be entitled to take its place
in the statute book along with the
funding bills of 1866 and 1868 and |
1873, all of which were mquestiOnably |
valid laws and have never been re-
pealed.
To ask me whether l will acquiesce |
in the decision of the court is-intend-
ing no disrespect to any one-to talk
nonsense. OF course / and every one
else will cheerfully acquiesce in that
decision, but after we have all acqui-
esced-what then?
When the funding bill of 1873 passed
we all acquiesced and admitted it was
a valid and constitutional law, but
afterward their sprang
up in Tennessee a readjuster party
which swept the State aud which de-
manded that another and better
settlement should be made, one which
would not only be held constitutional
by the Supreme Court if it was ever