The Houston daily post. [volume] (Houston, Tex.) 1886-1903, 1898-03-17
AS TO CITY SCRIP.

The question Of the Availability OF lssu
ire city scrip to meet the currcn. expenses
OF the city government, when funds are not
Immediately available. is one Of public rol-
Icy IN which all citizenB are Interested ir-
respective Of their preferences for mayor
md without reference to municipal cam
raigns.
1t Is a matter OF the same character and
on the same plane as the issuance Of bonds,
or levy Ing taxation, or paving streets---of
purely business rather than political sig-
nificance. and II is In that way that The
Post discusses 1t.
The chief objection to the issuance OF
scrip Is based on the theory that II is the
poor man who Ia working for the city, or to
whom the city is indebted, who suffers by
this policy. But suppose the city should
compel its poor creditor to wait two or
three months for his money? II there were
no likelihood OF his obtaining his pay
within thirty days, what would become OF
him? He could not obtain long credit
of the necessaries of life. His city note. on
the other hand. gives him basis OF credit
ard II Is better even to lose n small dis
count than to have his family In want. AS
between no pay for months, therefore. and
nay in tho city's notes. that can BIO imme-
dately used, there Will be no question that
the latter plan is the preferable one.
But. say the opponents to the issuance
OF SCRIP. pay in money, If It has to be bor-
rowed!" This Is sometimes, and generally.
easier said than done. Suppose the cIty's
credit Is too low to borrow--is there any
recourse left except resort to scrip? Dur
Ing the preceding city administration
money could only be borrowed al high
rates OF interest upon the personal in
dorsement 1t Ia said, OF two of the alder
men. 1t 10 questionable II the city itself
could have borrowed dollar, for current
expenses. either In law or fact, at the
time referred to or since, upon its own
credit alone!
be this as 1t may, there Is still a stronger
and controlling argument against the poll
ley of borrowing money to meet this float
ing indebtedness, or these running ey-
htises. To borrow is 10 violate the plain
business principle that q non interest ho,r.
Ing debt Is preferable to an interest bear
ing one The city Is not compelled TO nav |
lis employees before 1t has collected the
revenues 1t could make the creditor whit |
II It were so disposed. Has It either 4, |
moral or legal right, therefore, TO increase
the burdens of the taxpayers generally, by
borrowing at high rates OF interest, merely
for the convenience OF employees? Is II not
better, as well as the only legal course LETT
open, to give due bills to It's creditors and
thus enable the latter to tide over an en-.
barrassing situation?
The Post applies the same prineiple here
that 1t applied to Natlopal affairs when Il
opposed Mr. Cleveland's bond issues II
was possible then to coin oliver or issue
notes without interest. In anticipation of
the revenues, but at the dictate OF the
money power and the New York hanks
large sums were borrowed on bonds and
the interest account increased by millions.
AS matter OF fact. the discount ON
Houston's scrip has been small, and large
numbers OF the people to whom II WAS paia
have held II without losing a cent. Tho
immediate convenience and assistance In
having 1t to use, by these who had II dis. ,
counted. We're doubtless worth much more I
10 them than the amount OF the dis
count - and FAR better than having 10 q
wait and suffer want while the city !
was without ready money and unable TO 4
get any, except by personal ia iorsements
and at great added expense 10 the tax
rayers as body.
The Post is discussing measures, not a
men. and 1t certainly approves of the roll II
Icy Of anticipating our revenues In tight
times by issuing non-interest- bearing :
Il