Year: 1879

The argus reprints that portion of Gen.
Ewings speech in which the Ohio candidate
for Governor repeats the charge that the
national debt and the annual interest charge
have greatly increased since the resumption
act went into operation. The matter was
fully explained by Secretary Sherman in his
address delivered in this city. That expla-
nation the Argus does not give, but goes
on repeating the old disingenuous charge,
and will probably continue to repeat it
throughout the campaign.


What are the facts in the case? Gen.
Ewing asserted that the debt has been in
creased $4,000, 900, and the interest charge
for 1878 and 1879 over $13,OO0O00. There
was temporary increase in the amount of
interest paid and an apparent increase in
the debt. How did it come about? The
law authorizing the refunding of the debt
required the Secretary of the Treasury to
give the bond-holders ninety days notice
of the time the bonds would be called in
and cease to bear interest. But the bonds
could not be called until the money with





funding act authorized the Secretary to pro-
vide this money by selling bonds bearing
lower rate of interest. This he did, and as
soon as they were sold and the money in
hand to pay the six per cents. called the
other bonds. OF course the four per cent.
bonds bore interest from the moment they
were sold, and of course the five and six per
cent. bonds bore interest until they were
paid. So for ninety days double interest
was paid on certain bonds That is how
Ewing gets at the increased interest of
which he speaks.


1t was not the Secretary's fault that dou-
BILE interest was paid. The law commanded
him to pay it. Furthermore, he requested
Congress to shorten the notice to be given to
the bondholders, and it refused. The DEM
ocratic House took no notice of his request
That is the true story of double interest
The Secretary is not responsible for it's pay
ment. Congress is. The case is similar
with the bonds. The five and six per cents.
were borne on the public debt statement un-
til they were paid, and the four per cents
placed there from the moment of their SALE
So for ninety days both classes of bonds ap-
peared in the statements. Who was respon-
sible for that? Not the Secretary, but the
Congress that refused to shorten the call.
Furthermore the money to pay the six per
cents. was in the Treasury, and so the ap-
pearance of increase of debt was not real
but illusionary. The argus, knowing these
facts, goes on to repeat the half-truths of
Ewings speech in order to deceive its read
ers who may not have seen Shermans speech.


A WASHINGTON dispatch to the Philadel-
phia Press says: SIT was pertinently re-
marked to-day, in connection with the fail
ure of the First National bank of Butler, Pa,
that it was a striking illustration of the wis
dom and safety of the national banking sys-
tenn, and might be well for the people who
last year were somewhat tainted with Green
back heresies to study the lesson it teaches.
Here was a bank of 100000 0capital and $780,
900 of circulation. Some stockholder dis
covers something wrong, calls the attention
of the government to it; an examiner is i'm
mediately sent to the bank; the cause of
complaint is found to be real, the govern
ment Immediately takes control and closes it
out in the interest of all concerned The
notes are everywhere over the country, and
yet not one dollar will be lost by their hold
erS. Had this failure been under the old
State bank system, such as the old Bank of
Commerce of Erie, the Farmers Bank of
Waynesburg, or the Lancaster Bank, the
holders Of notes, who would likely have been
daily laborers or merchants of small means
in different parts of the State, would have
been the sufferers. Under the National
bank law, however, such persons would be
thoroughly protected. 1t might be well for
demagogue fnanciers who are prating about
the so-called monopoly of the national banks
to moralize on the security which the hold
ers of the notes of the National Bank of
Butler enjoy"