Year: 1875




NASHVILLE, TENN, March 8, 1871
see a communication in your issue of to-
day, signed "P.," on the subject of State
bank. ''P." says, "my plan is to call
Constitutional Convention instructed to
amend the Constitution so as to permit the
establishing Of State Bank" etc. l agree
with his plan, Except as to the issuing Of
State bOnds,) not simply because it
is precisely the same plan l suggest
ed in the columns of your valuable
paper months ago, (the bonds exeepted) be-
cause a State bank is the only Substantial
lgGy IN lrhich relief can be had. And if
"I'' will examine the bills before the House
he viii find there two bills offered by the
Hon. III. ShackalGord, of Coffee, which
cover the whole ground. One is for calling
the convention which be advocates, and the
other is a bill for establishing a State bank.
Both bills have passed one reading
the proper committees. l am aware of the
fact that you, too, have advocated the is
suing Of State bonds as a basis for a State
bank, and am also confident of the fact
that you are open 10 conviction, or cOnver-
sion to better plan if one be presented,
believing, as do, that you are aiming for
the best interest Of the greatest number.
Now, the bill before the House in
trodueed by the Representative from
Coffee, pledges not only the assets
State for the redemption Of its issues on
presentation al the counter in national cur
Tency, or gold on and after the day the
United States Government resumes specie
payments. l ask in all eandOr if 'any
Han auafr -
see' that the plighted faith Of the
State is as good, if not better, for a
one thousand dollar bank bill issued
by the State bearing no interest as it would
be for a one thousand dollar bond bearing
six per cent. interest? This 1 assert, with
out the fear Of successful contradiction,
that there is no necessity whatever for the
issuing Of State bonds for the purpose of
starting State bank. The bonds cannot
by any possibility OF reasoning make the
nOte-holders more secure. But on the con-
trary be an actual injury Of at least $780,
600 per annum, because the bank would
have 70 send to New York or Europe where
the bonds were held, that much annually
TO pay interest $500, 600 sent out of our
State annually, never to return. And
for what? Do we Get anything in
return? Absolutely nothing; it would
simply be making the bond-hOldeTs an an
nual gift of S300,O because this bank
could at ali times command several times
the amount Of its own issues in green
backs. Think for a moment Of the mil
lions of produce shipped for which the
bank pays out its own issues and imme-
diatelv gets in return therefor greenbacks
or exchange az its own election. And
there is too much objection to the issuing
of any more State bonds. The
convention to assemble would be
UeTU 10th to alter the constitution
so as to open the way for issuing
more bonds, and, indeed, there can be no
necessity for any more. The issues Of a
State bank will supercede the necessity for
all time TO come Of issuing any more State
bonds. Many plans have been presented
let Us agree to unite our etiOTJ IS on the most
feasible plan-the most simple, the cheap
est and the best. And Mr.. P. will pardon
me for saying I think (and have
studied the question thoroughly
that the Honorable Ii. ShackelfOrd's
two bills before the House cover the whole
ground. 1 know some men are 10th to give
up a plan simply because they suggested it;
but this should not be the case at this try
ing time when there is so much real suffer
ing for the want Of a home currency. And
therefore, nOtWithstanding{th fact that
am opposed to issuing bonds 10 start bank
because Of the unnecessary annual loss Of
$4,000, vet rather than do without the
bank, 1 say ifnO other plan can be found,
let us issue EOnds ana have the bank by all
means. W. S. II.