[No. XC.j THE TABLET " Legijlalors by overlooking falls, sometimes trouble themfilves tofct- ( tie principles, when there is no occajion for them. TH E fir It obie& to be regarded in the examination of a prac- i tical fubjeft, is to ascertain all the facts which relate to it. If this rule were dr.ftly observed, many of the debates which take place in public alfemblies would be avoided. There is no error so which men are more liable, than taking things for granted which are not true. Mistakes of this kind expose people to much painful reflection, and produce a warmth and altercation of de bate to no ufeful purpose. Why (hould one perplex himfelf to assign a cause for an effect which exists only in imagination ? why ihould we attempt to apply a remedy to an evil, before we exam ine the faffs, and determine whether the evil we propose to re dress, has any existence. A man must feel in an auk ward fixa tion, who having employed several days in the difculTton of prin ciples, (hould find that the cafe, to wh.ch he meant to apply them, was merely a creature of fiction. I can better illuilrate my ideas by a fpecific example, than by general reflections. The very important question di (cuffed in a refpeftable alTembly is not remote from the purpose. I allude to the difcuHion relative to a discrimination between originalmd pur chasing holders of public certificates. It does not come within the design of my speculations to enter into political dilputes, and I (hall wave a consideration of the principles that were adduced, in support of either fide of the question. The debates on the oc casion discovered good talents at investigation. The remarks were judicious, and the reasoning ingenious. But it was evident that the speakers were not generally acquainted with thole facts that were the ground work of the whole business. The point to be determined was, whether original creditors had any demand in justice for the indemnification of the losses in curred by the transfer of their certificates. It was pretended that the assignee ought to relinquilh part of the sum exprefled on the face of the certificate, for the benefit of the original holder. A compromise, it was urged, ought to be made between them, and the property divided. This pretence was founded on two pre mises, which many of the speakers conceived to be fa£fcs, without any enquiry into the matter. One of these supposed fads is, that original holders have gene rally fold their fecuritiei at about one eighth partof their nominal value. .. The other is, that they were compelled by ncceflky thustodif pofe of their securities. , Few of the speakers, in the examination of the fubjedt, expref. fed any doubt of the propriety of taking these fuppofuions for un. disputed fafls. By a pifconception of the real (late of the cafe, there was a most anxious effort to reconcile a difference of opinion, which would not have exifled at all, had the f„£ts been previoudy examined. It may be proper in thd firft place to enquire who have been the principal losers by the fluctuating price of public securities. And, secondly what were the causes that generally induced ori ginal creditors to transfer their certificates. To the firll of these points, I reply that if the government pays the possessor of a certificate, the amount exprefled on the face ot it, no daft of creditors will fuffer an undue proportion of loss. In such i decision all the creditors whether real or imaginary (hould be put into claflcs, and an opinion formed upon an aggregate view of each class. Some individuals in each division will no doubt be found to have been diftinguiihed fufferers ; but I believe if the lodes are fairly dated among the several clafles, ihe difference will be too little to agitate the public mind with devising a mode of redress. Forfeiting aside the question of the justice or injustice of an interference of the government, the cases of real injury are too few to constitute any claims for general remedy. It is not probable that a twentieth part of the domestic debt is held under such circumstances as to render it a doubt, viewed cither on prin ciples of justice, or sentiments of generosity, whether any persons, but the present holders, {hould receive the payment. It admits of a tolerable degree of demonstration, that the ori ginal creditors, who have alienated their securities, have fold them on an average of twelve (hillings and fix pence on the pound. As they have a longtime had the benefit of the money, their situation is not less favorable than the present holders. It will here be ob served, that many persons have in fact fold securities at two (hil lings and fix pence on the pound ; and it may be asked what de scription of persons fold at this low rate. This point is easily made clear. It (hould firft be undfrftood that not more than a tenth part of the domestic debt was in circulation, at the low fta gesof depreciation. Thole who (old at the lowed ebb of dock', and sustained the principal loss, were generally early pur chafers and not original holders. (To be continued.) HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES. MONDAY, FEBRUARY 15. (continued.) IN Committer of the whole on the report of the Secretary of treasury. Mr. Madison's motion for a discrimination under consideration. Mr. Lawrance observed, that the proportion of Mr. Madison derived force from the talents and knowledge of that gentleman in public tranfattions ; but that, on examination, it would be found to contain do&rines very repugnent to the interest and prosper ity of the union. Mr. Lawrance dated* that the debts contra&ed by the United States were for loans of moiiey, supplies of articles necessary for the public wants, and for a&ual service rendered indifferent em ployments. These debts were ultimately adjuftcd and reduced to their pre font transferable form. Every part of *he contra# was rffential to it: The negocration was a material part, and the na ture of the contrast was frequently recognized by the late govern ment. That in 1783, Congress recommended certain funds to be eftabUfhed to pay the interest and put the principle in a course of discharge. This recommendation was unequivocal, as to the na ture of it, and made no discrimination between the pofleflbr and the original holder. The fubfequcnt condudl of that body was conformable to this recommendation. They annually called on the States to furnifti money to pay the interest, without discrimi nating between the original holder and present pofleffor. They paid interest on the securities, without makingany discrimination. J?rovifion has been made for holders of loan-office certificates, that weie fubjeft to liquidation, to have them cancelled and o thers iflued for the specie value. And the holders ot certificates were enabled to have them regifteredto guard against accidents; & no diftin&ion was between the original holder and the alie- PUBLISHED WEDNESDAYS AND SATURDAYS BY JOHN FEN NO, No. 9, MAIDEN-LANE, NEW-YORK. No. XC, CONGRESS. SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 20, 1790, nee. The transferable nature of the claim was for the benefit of the creditor, because it gave it an a&ive value. He consented to take it, and consulted his own advantage. The conduct of the late Congress, since the war. has been uniform in the support of thiscontratt, and they have done no a£l to impair its obligation according to the terms of it. This contratt is valid against the government ; for, notwithstanding the truth of Mr. Madison's observation, that the nation was the fame tho the bodies that ad ministered the government were different—there is yet a far great er fesurity ; and to remove all doubt, a clause is inserted in the constitution, that made all debts and engagements, valid against the United States under the late general government, valid against the present. Mr Lawrance further observed, that this contract having de scended upon the government, there is no right in the legislature to impair the force of it. The particular governments are re strained from pa fling laws impairing the obligations of contratt. This interference would be a violation of the contrast between the individuals when the certificates were transferred ; and it will not be pretended that the States are prohibited, and the general governmenthas power to do it. Mr. Lawrance adverted to the principles of Mr, Madison, to reft the obligation of the public on the original holder ; and ob served that the fame principles arc in favor of the present pofleffor. That public justice requires a performance of contra&s, when there is no fraud on the part oI the holder. The pofleffor has been guil ty of no fraud, no deception: the between him and the ori ginal holder was fair, and a hazard and rifle, attended the purchase adequate to the advantage; and nothing (hort of a revolution in government could have produced payment. If there was an im position, the public occasioned it ; and, between the original hold er and the public, there might be a claim for retribution. Pub- lic faith is as facrcdly pledged to the bearer, or present pofleffor, as to the original creditor. Public credit results from fair and upright conduct ; and the government, to support it, must perform its contrails. Thi? is a contratt recognized by them, and as such (hould be discharged. The situation we have been in made it proper for us to be cautious on this fubjedfc ; and even at present people doubt our disposition to establish our credit. This would give a fatal blow to it. Much has been said about public opinion. Public opinion is difficult to be ascertained ; gentlemen have dif ferent modes to determine it. He supposed it was better ascer tained by the a£ls of public bodies, than by squibs in the news papers, or by a pamphlet written by any individual. The uni form conduct of men, deputed by the particular States to repre sent them in the late general government, was a standard ; and their opinion, from 1783, was in favor of the present pofleffor. Thecondudlof the particular States is another circumstance : I do not know of aifv discrimination made by them, tho it has been attempted : The general opinion of men of property is against it; and thefc sources of public opinion are moll certain and unequi- vocal, Mr. Lawrance further observed, that altho he believed Mr. Madison supposed no advantage would be derived to the United States, from this discrimination, yet much would arise. Part of the army had been composed of foreigners ; many had left the country, others are dead and their relatives ; all their part would be unclaimed. That certificates were issued to public of ficers to a great amount, and were paid by them to persons from whom they purchased. The difficulty of making proof of the original creditor will be great; and from this circumstance great sums would be gained to the public. Theie are persons enough who would have sagacity to discern this ; and they would doubt the purity of the public motive (hould the Gentleman's plan be adopt ed. Mr. Lawrance adverted to the circumstance of the new credit- | or receiving paper : that this paper might be fubjeft to another li- ; quidation on the fame principle as the present. That it would t i introduce doubt and distrust of public engagements ; and there . would be no greater security, although a fund was pledged, than there is at present; for whenever the public pleased, they might destroy the obligation. Mr. Lawrance observed, that arguments were improperly ad drcflTcd to their feelings; but that however hard it may be for the original creditor, who had parted with his certificates, to contri bute to pay the debt; yet it would be aqually hard on him who had been injured by continental money, who had been plundered by the enemy, who had his property burned by them in the course of the war ; and instances of this kinds were numerous. Mr. Lawrance adverted to the doftrineof the high court of e quity ; and urged that this court must be governed by principle. Was the committee this high court, and the United States' original creditor and present pofleffor before them ; If there appeared no fraud on the part of the poffeflbr, the original creditor would have no just claim on him. Between the United States ?nd original creditors, the United States were in fault; and the claim, if good would be against them. Mr. Lawrance also noticed the resolution of Congress of 10th April, 1780, relative to the depreciation of pay to the army ; and declared that this was limitted to persons then in service : those who had left it, even the day before, had not this juftire done them : But this cafe was between the United States, and the per sons rendering them service. The ast did not affect third persons ; it did not take from one and give to another, as the present mea sure proposes and was therefore diflimilar. Mr. Lawrance further observed, that his objection to the a mendment was on the ground of thecontraft ; yet he would men tion some instances to shew the impra&icability of the scheme. In many cases a State has fold lands, for low value in these certifi cates. by the law of this State, creditors residing within the British lines during the A*ar, had received by law these certificates, at their nominal value, from their debtors. British and domestic creditore have received from their debtors large sums at their no minal value. Foreigners are pofTeffed of large sums of the re o-iftcred debts, in their names, for alienated certificates. These and many other instances which might be mentioned, will shew the difficulty of devising a scheme, with the checks and excep tions that would be proper to render it in any manner feafible. It has been objeftcd to the Secretary's report, that it proposes a redu&ion of interest. He observed, that there is a material dif ference in a plan that made the consent of the creditor ncpefTary, and one that reduces his capital without his consent This part is not now under consideration ; but the scheme of the gentleman from Virginia will add a considerable sum to the provision pro posed by the Secretary, from the increased interest to be provided for, and the additional number of officers to be appointed to car ry his plan into execution. Mr. Lawrance observed, that he was still open to convithon ; but that he was, at the time of speaking, against Mr. Madison's proposition. Mr. Smith (S- C.) next rose and remarked, that it vm neceffa rv and proper the house should give the fubjefl the moll ample difcuflion. The question had long agitated the public mind, and the people should know that it had occupied the ferions atten PRICE THREE DOLLARS PR. ANN tion of their representatives, and be made acquainted with the principles of their decifjon. For his part, having bestowed on it the mod attentive consideration, he could aflert, that the more he contemplated it the more he was imprrffed with a conviction that the proportion was unjust, impolitic and impracticable. It con fided of two parts : the one was to take away the property of one person ; the other was to give that property to another : and this by a voluntary interposition of the house, by a taere ast of power, without the aflfent of the former, or without even the application of the latter ; for it was remarkable that the original holders, who had alienated their certificates, had not come forward with this demand ; and it is presumable that, had they applied for redress, they would rejeftany indemnification which was the result of such manifeft injultice. To prove that this was taking away the pro perty of a citizen by force, heobferved, that the purchaser had, by a fair purchase, acquired a right to a full amount of the sum expressed in the certificate, which it was not within the power of the house to divest him of. No tribunal on earth could lawfully deprive a man of his property, fairly obtained. The purchaser bought under :he ast of Congress making the seCurities transfera ble ; and having given the market price, without fraud or impo sition, he was by virtue 6f such purchase vested with the complete and absolute ownerlhip of the certificate, as fully as the original holder ; and had as much right to demand full payment as the original holder would have had, had the security been still in his hands. Even should the house refufe, by an ast of power, to pay him more than half, his demand for the other half would still re main against the public ; it could not be extinguifhad ; the debt would continue to haunt them ; the creditors would loudly cla mour for justice, and sooner or later the balance would be paid. Then would they mcur all the odium of a violation of private rights, without derivin^tOL-the-public any advantage whatever. Heconfidered the measure as doing a certain evil that a poflible good might result from it : this was not, in his opinion, the pro the proper mode of doing good. Justice cannot be founded on injustice ; and to take money out ot the pocket of one man to put it into that of another, is a precedent which may juftify future in terferences. This step would lead the house to others : for if the principle be a just one, then the government should look into all the tranfaftion? and speculations of individuals, in order to cor rect them, and make retribution to every individual according to his lofTes. He was persuaded that the true policy of a legislative bodv, was to pursue the broad road of justice clearly marked out before them ; for it was an undeniable truth, that whenever they deviated into these by-roads and trackless paths, without any other guide than their own imaginations, they would get bewildered in a labyrinth of difficulties, and rejoice to trace back their steps and regain the plain road. Now the plain line of conduct was, to do ftrift justice, such as is inforced in judicial tribunals between man and man in a similar cafe. The debtor is bound to pay the debt to the holder of the security ; the contrast, between the giver of the bond and the person to whom it was given, is done away the moment the latter afligns it to another person. If A. gives a bond to B. who parts with it to C. there is no longer any obliga tion 6n the part of A. to pay to B. but he must pay it to C. A, has nothing to do with the pri\ate negociations between B. and C. nor to inquire what consideration was given for the security. , All that he has to enquire is, whether he really signed it and had value received for it and the amount of it: he cannot fay to the holder, you gave but 50 dollars for this security of 100, and I will pay you only 50 ; for the law will compel him to pay the 100: This is law and justice between man and man : is there another fort of law and justice for the government ? By what rule is the govern ment to square its conduct, if not by those sacred rules which form the basis of civil society, and are the fafeguard of private property ? These observations fully refute the remarks of the gentlemen from Virginia, that the orginal holders still have a claim on rhe government, notwithftandingthey have transfered their securities ; and that in cases of individuals bearing an analogy to the present, a court of equity v. ould interpose and give redress. The direst contrary was the fact ; there never was an inftancc of a court of c quity afTuming such power. In cases of bankruptcy, which are under the fuperintendance of courts of chancery, the debts of the bankrupt are paid in equal proportions to all the creditors, whe ther original holders orafllgn'ees, and the court never enquires in to the terms of the alienation. It cannot be said that the original holder has any claim of justice on the government; his claim must be addressed to our humanity ; but the House have no authority to gratify their humane inclinations at the expence of justice, and by a facrifice of private rights. If the proicft was unjust in itfelf, the application of the property to relieve the diftrefles of the ori ginal holder cannot change its nature ; it must still be unjust ; the mode of appropriation cannot alter the rcftitude or turpitude of the measure. If therefore Congress have the right to take away the property of the present holders, they may apply the savings tc> public purposes ; and what appearance would such a scheme have to the world ? Would it not ruin forever our national character ? The gentleman from Virginia had (aid, that justice and good faith were the substratum of public credit : but lie was persuaded that the justice and good faith held out by this plan, would be a substratum of sand, a foundation too weak to fupportour public credit, which would soon crumble to pieces. If the object o£ the gentleman be to afford relief to thediftrefled, without impair ing legal rights, let enquiry be made into the cases of those ori ginal holders who fold from absolute distress—let those cases be fele&ed and brought forward, and he would yield to no member in his alacrity to give them every adequate compensation, and to indemnify them for their fufferings ; —but he could not as sent to a proposition which blended together the cases of aJI the original holders, and gave them the propertv of others. That there were various classes of original holders ; some had fold for purposes of speculation or trade ; and had proba bly made good bargains, and were now in a better plight than if they had still retained their fecuritics ; others got rid of their securities because they had no confidence in the government: these the public are not bound to indemnify ; this plan would place them on a better footing than those who having confidence in the general government had, notwithstanding their diftrefTes, kept their securities ; for supposing the former fold eight years ago for 4s. in the pound, it was not improbable they had by this time doubled their money, and in addition to that they were to get io_ which would give them 18s. whereas the latter would be able to fell their securities at the market for 15 or 16s. after they were funded. Some had exchanged their securities for bonds of indi viduals, of which the real value cannot be *fcertained, or for land or other property, which may have risen considerably in value. Some present holders have received their fccurities by way of le gacy—Are these to have one half taken off ?—is their patrimonial estate to be torn from them ? Had their parent been still living, he would receive 20s. in the pound, but the circumstance of his death is to strip the child of one half. The gentleman from Virginia had said, that giving the present holders, by alienation, the highest market price, would be doing them ample jnftice ; but did the public mean to defraud them the
Significant historical Pennsylvania newspapers