The advocate., 1891-09-23
WE'RE THE GOVERNMENT BONDS PAY
ABLE IN LEGAL TENDER MONEY!

VI O0pV0uAOOA AOt HHOVVO VnO ASA4V"AAt
paragraph from The ADVOCATE, the
truthfulness Of which it calls in ques
tiOn.
But we imagine we hear the objection that th'
value OF the bonds Is in the promise to pay then
In gold. Was this the case when the bonds werC
issued? Every one knows it was not. Wher
Che gOvernmet bonds were issued, they were By
the act which authorized them, made payable IL
lawful money Of the United States; and Lawful
money Of the United States at that time con
sisted OF gold, silver and treasury notes. Up ID
1869 these bonds were.payable In greenbackS, SC
shat both the bonds and the money in which
they might be paid rested solely upon the credit
ofthe government, and yet they were never con.
sldered questionable security. 10 required the
SO-caIled "CredIt Strengthening Act" Of 1869 to
make these bonds payable In coin, and this fol-
lowed by the demonstration OF silver, to make
them payable In gold, and the Republican party
Is welcome TO all the glory to which these acts
entitle It,
Commenting upon this paragraph
the Capital says:
The bonds never were papable In anything
but gold, and nowhere is there the slightest
foundation for the m0nStrous falSehO0dS In
the above paragraph.
Is it possible that the editor Of the
Capital is ignorant upon this sub
ieCtl IL would be q charitable view
indeed TO take Of the above statement
TO regard it as a result ofignoranCe,
though it would OF course not be
Creditable to one who assumes TO be q
public teacher. Whether it be re-
suit Of ignorance or mendacity we
propose to show It's absolute false
hood and the truth of our former
declarations. In the discussion Of
the "Act to Strengthen the Public
Credit" in the United States Senate
February 27, 1869, Senator Doolittle
said:
The evidence Is the market price Of the bonds,
precisely running part pGSsU with the value Of
the greenback as compared with gold. 1t is be.
cause they fOFeign holders Of bOndS) knOwlt was
NOT gold contract that they doubt whether they
can receive the gold. True, as parties to the
contract, they Vorelgn hOlders) will press upon
this government to pledge itself to pay principal
and interest in gold; and 80 will the bOndhOlderS
at home; It Is their interest to do SO. But what
is the fair construction Of the contract? When
these bonds were issued the very law which
authorized them to be Issued declared that the
legal tender notes which were authorized TO be
issued should be lawful money and legal tender
In payment Of every public debt except the In
tereSt and except the duties on imports. When
It ID 30 declared In the law, and when you take
into account the fact that what the government
received was deprecated paper money, and
when the bOndhoders took the bonds they took
those bonds under law which declared In OK.
press terms that the very same lawful money
which they loaned to the government should be
legal tender, should be received In discharge
Of all debts, public and private, except the In
terest upon the public debt and duties upon Inn
ports, they knew that they took the bonds sub
ject 10 that contingency. - Congressional Globe,
page 1862.
Senator Sherman, in the course OF
his remarks in the same discussion,
made use of the following language:
do not believe, and never could reason my
self Into the belief, that the law which author
lzad the iRanA of kheaA honda madA n dIaorimIna-
ton against the lawful tender money Of the
United States. think so yet and do believe
now that by fair and reasonable construction
Of those laws the bonds Of the United States
might be paid In lawful money issued within the
limits and according to the terms OF those laws.
rn,,ov.ssafov,Ol nIoha MANA 1eeo