The weekly Floridian. [volume] (Tallahassee, Fla.) 1867-19??, 1892-02-06
AT WASHINGTON.
SHA VZNGS FROM OLD MATS READY
PENCIL.
BUDGET OF CAPITAL CITY ITEMS WRIT
TEN BY FLORIDA CRACKER AND SENT
HERE TO BE READ BY CRACKERS ONLY.
WASHINGTON, D. c., Jan. 80

| What "Old Nat" has to say, is to say,
and saying this. he says that this letter
concerns those only whom it does con-
Germ. Therefore he gives notice that he
will prosecute-or be prosecuted-any man,
woman or grown up child, male or female
black or blue, or any and all persons that
are mentioned in the catalogue, except a
certain class of distinguished politicians
who would make the past Call and Anti
Call question an issue in our state politics
in the coming campaign. This class
would not be responsible-who reads the
following and feels unconcerned.
T'is SAID that law is nuisance-no one doubts it.
But men as we are, we can't get along without it,
The account between the General Gov
ernment and the State of Florida, known
as Florida's Indian War Claim is para
mount to all other business now at the
national capitol with Florida statesmen
A bill to adjust settlement, introduced
IN the house several weeks ago by Mr..
Mallory, has been referred to the committee
on claims, and said committee has placed
the same in the hands of General Bullock,
as a subcommittee.
The general has been ardently at work
fJr several days and nights trying to mas
ter fully the many important features Of
this claim so as to be able to acquit him.
sell before the committee that the account
is an equitable one and that the General
Government should no longer delay in its
adjudication.
TO expect equity, you must do equity, is
An old law saying that is true, and if Flor
ida has not done full justice in this long
delayed matter, then the word-justice-
should be stricken from the English vocab-
ulary.
r 1t seems from the record, that all along
between the years 184t, to 1853, the state
of Florida issued bonds bearing seven per
cent interest which were negotiated far
below their face value for the purpose of
dtfraying the expenses incurred by the two
Seminole wars-a debt which the General
Government should have assumed These
bonds were disposed Of through many
channels; regardless, however, of who
holds them, they were issued in good faith
money was obtained on them in good faith
and in good faith the holders should b.
paid every cent.
| These bonds should be Cancelled and with
the lights before me, venture to say that
he long wished for and talked of settle
ment of this claim will soon be secured
The records are not clear in what pre-
else sum the funds for the expenditures by
the state were provided for loans effected
upon interest in bonds beyond those that
eral Government. 1t follows, however,
that they drew the same interest as the
seven per cent, bonds issued to the United
States. We find the amount borrowed
state to the United States as expressed by
report of the third auditor of the treasury
to the 51st congress in the following lam
guage:
Expenses incurred by the state in sup
suppressing Iudian hostilites between De-
cember l, 1866, and January l, 1860-$268,-
1O3 40; sundry expenses for similar expenses,
Incurred in 1s49 but. not paid by the state
until 1859, $2,16s72
The report further says: "The first re-
port was taken from that of the secretary
of war made May %, 1882 who in making
the report excluded the last mentioned
items because he the secretary of var) was
limited to make report to expenses in
CURED between December /, 1855, and
January l, 1880" The act which passed
congress in 1889 requiring a report upon
any now unsettled claim causes full re-
port of this matter to be made, which is
set forth as in said report of the secretary
of the treasury to the 51st congress.
On the claim originating in the
| years $24o, ,41o67
Deduct amount realized by the
state by sales Of military stores. 1,4O6.e6
245, ,o2o.ss
In these items OF expenses in
lS40 (paid by the state 1S59.).... 1e,913.46
Aggregate. .................... s2sl, ,ss4sl
The first comptroller states, however,
that balance of $72, ,756. Al, stands against
Florida on account, under the ''direct tai"
of an act of August 5, 1851; but this re-
port will in no wise be considered or toll.
Grated. This "direct tax" matter was
clearly settled in the case of United Ststes
vs.. Louisiana (l28 U. 4. Reps. 82) the su-
preme court decided that the apportionment
of the tax ($2OOOO, ,0O0) among the states
was merely descriptive of the aggregate to
be assessed upon lands ofindividuals with
in each state; the act contemplated in the
first instance, that the United Sta tes would