The home journal. (Winchester, Tenn.) 1858-188?, 1882-06-07
HEAsLEY's PROTEST
Against the Passage Of the
State Debt Bill.

The following protest was entered
against the passage Of the 6O-3-4-5-6 =
bill by Franklin county's representative;
Mr.. SpEAKER-The undersigned pro
tests against the passage Of Senate bill
No. 8, entitled "An Act to compromise
and fund the bonded Indebtedness Of the
State, for the following reasons:
LIST. 1t is unconstitutional, unjust, I'M
democratic, unwise and inexpedent.
I'd. In our opinion the manifest object
Of this Act is to transfer the railroad
debt to the shoulders Of the people, and
to procure the dismissal of the suit
against the railroads, which is now
pending in the Supreme Court OF the
United States.
Bird. The State Of Tennessee never
owed dollar Of the railroad debt and
ought not to pay it. The statute cx-
prcssly provided that the railroads were
to pay the interest as it fell due and the
principal at maturity This was the
reason why the internal improvement
system was SO popular before the war
! Atthat time no otherdoctrne was heard.
But now we are told that the State ought
to pay the debts Of solvent roads be-
cause they have turned over to the
Comptroller about fifteen million dollars
in bonds and coupons Of insolvcnt COM
panIcs, which cost the solvent roads
about three million dollars in good
money. There might be some force in
this argument if the State had ever been
liable for the debts Of insolyent compa-
MICS. This il the turning point. If the
State was not liable for the payment of
the bonds Of insolycnt companies it was
no benefit TO the State for the solvent
roads to get them up and turn them
over to the Comptroller. The statute
! expressly declared that the bonds issued
to railroad companies should constitute
liens upon the roads to which they were
issued, and that the roads should pay
the interest rs it fell due and principal
at maturity. The solvent roads admit.
ted their liability and endeavorcd to
escape it in the manner We have indica.
ted. But what about the liability Of
the inoOlvcnt companies for the bonds
issued to them? These bonds were Il
lien upon the insolvent roads, and moth.
Ing could relieve the roads Of the lien
but the payment Of the bonds. Have
they ever been paid? No. What ha,
become Of the insolvcnt roads? They
are in the hands Of solvent companies
How did these solvent companies ge
them? They claim to have Dough
them from the State. But did the Stat
sell eleven insolvent roads? No. |
merely sold her interest in them. VIVA
interest did she have? She had no pc
cuniary interest except in so far as sh
had paid interest for them Oh thei
bonds, and this she had done to II larg
. amount What did the States intcres
bring2 1t brought So, 69S, 900 in illcga
and greatly deprecated bonds and cou
pons, which cost the solvent roads abou
81, $50, 600 After this sale took plac
: how were the holders of the bonds o
, msolvent roads t. get interest upon thei
bonds ? The statute eXpressl y provide,
that the purchasers Of the States intel
est were to take the roads subject to til
; lien Of these bonds. The sale OF tn
States interest was not intended to +,
lievc the lnsolvent roads Of any of thei
liabilities. But these roads have passe
into the hands Of solvent companies
Yes. When the solvent companiC
bought the States interest they too
possession Of the roads and then bougl
= up II large amount Of the bonds tn;
were lien upon them. These bon,
e have been turned over to the comptro
Ter for cancellation, and the solvent con
y panies have made magnificent spccul
ton. They got the States interest
& eleven insolvcnt roads for about 81, $50
e 600 in good money, and for about thrt
II million dollars more they got up abol
u fifteen million dollars in bonds that wei
II II lien on these roads, while the roa,
Il thcms elves are worth about twelve mi
;, lion dollars. 1t fully appears, therefor
II that if the suit in the Supreme Court
the United States is decided in favor
Il the bondhoIders, the solvent railroa
II companies will have no valid clai
II against the State for the value of Il
n bonds cancelled by the Comptroller, b
st cause they have possession Of the roa,
that these bonds were Il lien upon, an
Is because the State never was under an
obligation to pay the debts of railroads
i, either solvent or insovent.
t, 4ih Another reason why we prote
against the passage Of the bill is becau.
the people are unable to bear the burdo
it places upon them The balance
trade is always against an exclusivel
u agricultural Stat. Money flows frol
} agricultural into manufacturing Stat,
e as naturally MS. the waters of the Missi
'I slppi flow down into the gulf. The hi
u tory Of the world shows that there a
: only two ways by which an agricultur
~ State can keep the amount Of curren,
&c it ought to have One is to make n
~ cal currency, as Virginia did in coloni
y. times; and the other is to encuura,
" and develop manufactures, under Il
~ fostering influence Of protect
III tariff, as France did by the advice
" Colbert. Tennessee is now an almo
u" II. exclusively agricultural State and Il
VI balance Of trade is against her O,
y cities, towns and villages are filled wi
~ goods that we're manufactured in Ne
ne England and old England. This ira,