The semi-weekly messenger., 1904-05-17
THE SPECIAL TAX BONDS.

Below we publish a letter to The New
York Sun from a northern man, now
Iresiding at Concord, in this state, on
the much discussed question of forcing
the southern states to pay the bonds
ISSUED by authority of the reconstruc-
ltjon legislatures and which those states
have repudiated or attempted to COM
promise. The idea is as novel as it is
impossible. At the same time there is
"a good deal of sense in it from a pure
lly moral standpoint. The federal gov
lernment, as administered by the repub-
llican party at that time, was response
BILE for the issuance of those bonds and
the fraudulent disposition of them,
whereby the states derived no benefit
whatever from the creation of the in
debtedness. The federal government is
not legally bound for the liquidation
of these bonds. But is it not morally
50? And being morally bound is it not
the least it can do to refuse to lend it's
aid to the holders of these bonds in the
collection OF their face value and the
accummulated interest for SO many
years is to amount to almost double the
principle?
| This writer says:
Il am a northern man who has spent
many years in the south, a republi-
lcan. and a voter in Pennsylvania.
The, United States supreme courts
decision in the South Dakota bond case
lhas awakened the interest of holders
lof reconstruction bonds all over the
north. I have been approached by
friends seeking a means to collect these
lbonds from the states of issue.
1.-The northern holders of these re-
lpudiated securities have little thought
Tor knowledge of the hopeless, helpless
lcondition in which the bonds were con-
lceived. With 'hope deferred maketh
the heart sick' feeling, they wish to
lcollect, little knowing that they own
lonly stolen horse. The southern
debtor feels that although he has re-
lpudiated and adjudicated these bonds
Ito the unforgettable past, they are still
lthere-a debt in some vague way
lstanding against his conscience and
Honor. He feels as if he had gone
Through bankruptcy, settled for 10
lcents on the dollar, and now, in his
returning prosperity this moral spec
tire, the other 80 cents, returns to haunt
lhis dreams. This is not all; if it was,
II venture to assert that the southerner
would ask no better pleasure than the
opportunity to pay these securities in
full. Stop and think; Why was he
bankrupt? Because in an evil day he
Twas overpowered by brother and
forced to place the signature of his
lstate upon these bonds against his
Twill.
rs not the case about this way? The
horse is stolen and sold to an innocent
purchaser, the stable locked, with no
lreward for recovery nailed to the door.
THE thieves are either in the limbo of
leternity or living in company with
lbad conscience by the grace of the stat
lutte of limitations.
Can it be righted? Compromise Is
lunthinkable. Lord Chief Justice Rus
isell said that there were many things
(which could not be arbitrated- or COM
promised, among men of honor. To the
Isoutherner this is a matter of honor,
land this country holds no citizen who
guards his honor more sacredly than
The.
This decision of the supreme court
lis certainly indicative of grave posi-
Utilities. The present owner wishes to
be rewarded for returning the stolen
horse to it's rightful owner. This for
mer owner objects to paying any re-
Iward for a useless animal.
L can see but one just and right way
Iout of the difficulty. 1t is way that
lshould produce most beneficent results.
These bonds were issued by legislators
who were elected when the states were
lunder the control of the United States
tarmy. The direction of the civil cleo
Itions was entirely in the hands of a
lot of unprincipled northern and
southern renegade "carpet-baggers''
whose very lives were preserved by
1.-THE ever-present army Of the United
States. The legislators who issued
these bonds were tools and co-workers
with the carpet bagging" vultures.
Both pocketed the proceeds OF the sale
lof the bonds. There were no proper
tiles created as securities for these
bonds, nor did the states receive any
moneys from their sale. This being the
lease, does not the moral responsibility
flor their creation and sale fall upon
the United States government? Could
the republican party do more gra-
lcious or saner act than to enact the
necessary legislation to wipe out these
debts by the United States?
No southerner, I believe, feels any
enmity against the republican party
for the part it took in the civil war,
while the republican party must
lkeenly feel the awful disgrace of re-
construction times. i believe that the
party at that time intended no wrong,
lyet under it's rule these grievous
wrongs were committed. Is this not an
opportunity to right. in a small meas
lure, past mistake? 1t certainly will
be extending the hand of fellowship,
Justice and love. Would not such an
lact be a large factor in reunitins
lulder one political faith the strong con-
iservative people of this country, an
Ideal which every true American should