{"character_count": 5879, "word_count": 1079, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9605000019073486], "ccnet_perplexity": [1705.699951171875], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
nublic woTks. deb;s for the war in Florida, claims of indemnity for Indian spolIations- 1 and if half of what we hear be true, the amount of these collective obligations cannot but be large.

 Here, then, I understand there is Q heavy

 debt hanging over the country, consisting oL

 various ilems-Some for borrowed money some to meet Indian treaties, and others 10

 pay claims and accounts not yet liquldated

 -all of which must be provided for and talk

 en into consideration in any 1alr estimate oI the ways and means.

 I agree with all that is said in the Message

 as to the great impolicy, in time ot Peace' ot

 commencing public debt but It seems to

 me rather extraordinary and inappropriate

 in the President to adnoniSh others against such measure, with all these facts lmlnedl-

 ately before him.

 None doubt, in point of principle or expe- diency, as to the creation ot n pubic deDt' whether in the form of stock or Of Treasury

 notes bearing interest and renewable; or IT there be any difference in point of expedien- cv, none at least can entertain any great

 doubt which of the two forms is best. Trea-

 sury notes are certainly not the cheaper of

 the two.

 1 Now, we find the existence of this public

 debt as early as the existence of the present administration itself. It began at the called

 session in September, 1887. From the date 1 of the first Treasury note bill in September, | 1857, there has been no moment m which the government was not in debt for borrowed

 money. The Secretary says 1t is not expect ed that the Treasury notes now out can De

 paid off earlier than in March. lS42 In

 whatever soft words he chooses to invest the

 matter, the sum and substance is this: that

 there must be a new issue of Treasury notes

 before the government can be freed from embarrassment.

 Imust confess that it seems to me that the scope and tendency of the remarks in the

 message do go to produce an erroneous irn-

 pression. Here are a series of very strong

 sentiments against public debt-against be- ginning a public debt-and ala said ID face of debt already begun-eXs:ing now, and under such circumstances as create the rear that it will turn out to be q very large one.-

 We know that these various outstanding charges cannot, or ut least will not, be brought together and presented tn one ag- gregate sum for some months to come. Is 1t intended by this document to torestal public opinion, SO as, when it shall appear that there is a public debt, to give to it a date posterior to the 4th of March next! Ihope not. lido not impute such design. So far, however, as am concerned, shall take special good care to prevent any such result. shall cer- tainly recommend that there be u new set of books opened that there be what the mer- chants call "a rest" That what is collected prior to le4l, and what is expended prior to i64l, stand against each other; so that. if there shall appear balance in favor of this administration, it may be stated; and if the result shall be that the administration is lett in debt, let that debt appear, and let it be de- nominated the debt of 164l," which it will be the duty of Congress to provide for.

 In one or two other respects the Message is calculated to create quite an erroneous im- pression. In the 5th page the President speaks on the subject of the Treasury notes in as mitigated a tone as possible, and tells us, first, that "this small amount still out standing" is "composed of such as are not yet due" Isuppose we all knew that; and then he adds that they are "less by twenty three millions than the United States have on deposite with the stutes" ask the Senate, and would, if \ could, ask tho President, whether he means to recommend to Con- gress to withdraw the deposites now in the hands of the states to discharge this debt on Treasury notes? Do the administration look to these depoSi;es as u fund out of which to discharge any of the debts of the Treasury find no recommendation of such a measure. Why, then, were these two things connect 1 ed! There is nothing in the fact that the amount of Treasury notes is loss by twenty. three millions than the amount deposited with the staics, unless he means 10 recom- mend that the latter sum shall be looked to as Q means of discharging the former. Does he mean to inform Congress thai twenty three are less than twenty eight! lf not. why are the two thus placed in juxtaposition The Secretary of the Treasury treats the matter in much the same way. He speaks Of the depOsjtes with the states as of funds in the Treasury. Look at his report. ln sta ting the resources of the Treasury, be mem tions the 2S millions on deposite with the states. What can be the purpose of such n statement? When Secretary of the Trfa- sury presents to the world statement ot the means of his department, 1t is universally supposed that his statement iS confined to what either exists tn the Treasury, or IS like ly to accrue under the operation of existing laws. But this deposite with the states Is no more under the control of the Treasury than any other money in the country. He knows full we'll that an act of Congress IS as neces- sary to his disposal of any part of that sum, as it is to augment the rate of duties ut the custom-house. The Treasury can no more use the deposites with the states, than It can lay direct tax. What can be the purpose

 -the fair purpose-of presenting sums as funds in the Treasury when they are not m the Treasury! Or what can be the fair pur- pose of referring to fund as means of pay ment, when it cannot be touched, unless the President meaEs to recommend 10 congress to recall the depoSiteS made with the states That Congress can do. and so it can augment the rate ot duties but till 1t does, those de- posites are no more means in tho Treasury than if they belonged to another nati0n.- hONy hnu NnHNO HQ-