THE CONFEDERATE SLIVEHOLDERS' COMPANY (LIMITED).
[FROM OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT.] New York, September 22, 1865. TFIREE or four months ago an Englishman said to me, " The Con- federate Loan is quoted at 13. Thirteen what? I can't see why it's worth thirteen pounds or thirteen pence. I'm glad Jefferson Davis don't owe me any money." This view is regarded here as a sensible one, and therefore we were surprised, and to own the truth, a little amused, at receiving last week a report of a solemn meeting, held at the London Tavern, of holders of the 7 per Cent. Cotton Loan Bonds of the late Confederate States, " so called," to • take such measures as might be found necessary for getting the interest and the principal of their money. It is very natural and very proper for men to desire to get back money that they have lent upon conditions, and some allowance should ba made for the reluctance, common to all men, to believe that that which they hold and have regarded as valuable, in some degree at least, is utterly worthless. But still that a number of men, merchants and professional men, among whom there must have been distributed a fair average of English common sense, should, after the events of last April, have regarded bonds which they held of the Confederate States as anything more than specimens of the engraver's art and interesting memorials of their connection with a great political movement is to us quite incomprehensible. These gentlemen lent their money—to whom or what ? To Mr. Davis, Mr. Benjamin, General Lee? Not at all. To Virginia, South Carolina, and other political corporations or States? No. • To ten millions of people, more or less, living in this country south of the Potomac and the Tennessee ? No. They lent money to a political body formed for certain expressed purposes and with certain expressed and very clearly-limited powers ; and as to the object of whose existence, and the source and limit of whose powers they were, or had the opportunity of being, perfectly well informed. They knew also perfectly well that at the time when they lent this money, the right of the body to which they lent it to receive the money, to hold property of any kind, nay, its very right to exist at all was disputed, and that these questions were in course of decision in the only manner in which they could be decided. They know now that the decision has gone against this body irrevocably ;—that the decision is, not that that body at a certain time ceased to exist, but that it never had a right to exist, that it was a name and nothing more, that the powers which it wielded were usurped, and that its every act was void from the beginning. They also knew that their loan was made for the purpose of assisting this body in its struggle against the power which denied its right to exist. And now, when the decision has gone against them, some of them at least talk of asking the succesful party in the contest to pay—not give, but pay them their money. They made their game and took their chances. They have lost ; and now they are asking for their stakes. This is our view of the matter ; and remember, I profess only to give that, not to decide the merits of the question. The holder of a Confederate Treasury note may read upon its face that it is a promise of the Confederate Govern- ment to pay a certain number of dollars six months, or longer, after the acknowledgment of the independence of the Confederate States. Now when that time arrives his money will be due, and it will be due from that Government. But until that time it is not due, nor can it be due at any time from any other body. But these gentlemen hold, not notes, mere promises to pay, but bonds, for which cotton was pledged as security. Well, if they can find any cotton which belongs to the Confederate Government the security is good, and their money is safe. To the goodness of security, however, there are two conditions, —one, the value or the sufficiency of the article pledged ; the other, the title of the person pledging it. If a man thinks of lending money upon a mort- gage he investigates very closely the title of the proposed mortgager to the property that he proposes to mortgage, and if through the fault of the conveyancer who makes the searches he lends his money upon property to which the borrower has not a good title, and the interest or the principal is not forth-
coining at the proper time, he finds not only that he has no security, but that he never had any. His claim is resolved into simple debt due by an individual. It is morally and legally a good claim upon that individual, but upon no other. Now the individual in this case is the Confederate Government ; and if these gentlemen can find that government, they may press their claim upon it with every semblance of right, and rightfully seize any property which it holds upon which there is not an equally valid and a prior lieu. They cannot find that govern- ment: can they not proceed against its representatives ? Who are its representatives? Can that be represented which did not exist, which was a sham from the beginning ?—a loud-talking, big-seeming, very troublesome sham, as many shams are, but still a sham. For that is the question which has just been de- cided in the only manner in which the question was capable of decision. But then there are the States which entered into this confederation (granted for the nonce that the confederation might be rightfully formed), the individuals who formed this corpora- tion, may they not be properly called upon to pay this money ? In the consideration of this question, it is of the first importance to remember that those States themselves are corporate bodies whose powers are not only strictly but doubly limited—limited by two written instruments, the constitution of each one of them and the constitution of the United States. It is safe to say that upon • examination it will be found that these States have neither the right nor the power to assume the payment of the loan in question.
The supposition that the Government of the Republic can with any semblance of propriety be asked to assume in any form or in any degree the payment of a debt incurred for the purpose of its own destruction is simply preposterous, and that the assumption of such a debt by any one of the commonwealths composing the Republic would be such an affording of aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States as the Constitution expressly declares to be treasonscan hardly be doubtful. The fact is that the holders of the Confederate bonds lent their money to a corporation with limited liabilities, even if it were sound. But it was "bogus."
And it is equally true that the security upon which the loan was effected was property to which those who pledged it had only the right of possession. The case is not peculiar, as any pawnbroker
can bear witness, and the same authority can inform these gentle- men what is the course of things under such circumstances. But
why thus go about with circumstance ? Money for Confederate bonds ? As well look for the last year's snow. This is our view of this matter.
It is reported that after the meeting which is the occasion of this letter the bonds fell one per cent (where from and where to presents itself as an interesting question), the reason being that the meeting afforded little hope to the bondholders. What, then, will be the fall in these bonds after the promulgation of a despatch from our State department, which was published here two or three days ago? This dispatch was written on the 10th of last mouth, and so was not elicited by this meeting, although it is addressed to Mr. Adams for the benefit of private parties, and not to be com- municated except under certain circumstances to the British Government. But if it had been written expressly to meet the case presented at the London Tavern it could not have done so more completely. The Government of the United States in that dispatch repudiates absolutely and finally all connection with the so-called Confederate Government, all responsibility for its acts, or liability for its indebtedness, either as heir, successor, or representative. It declares in effect that it will pay no
regard whatever to the decision of any foreign court of law upon this question, which, as far as it—this Government— is concerned, is not even to be entertained. The attempt
of any court to dictate or prescribe the relations of this Government to its own subjects is pronounced " presumption." This passage may be one of those in the dispatches of our State Department under the present administration, or in past days, which are characterized by European journalists as intentionally offensive. But it is right that I should say that it expresses plainly and decidedly, though without the ivish to be more offen- sive than the nature of the case makes inevitable, the feeling of the people of the United States at what they regard as an unwarrantable intrusion. For British courts of law they have profound respect. In any case of dispute between citizens of the two countries, or between citizens of one and the government of the other, they would rest with entire confidence upon the learn- ing, the soundness, and the high judicial probity of the British bench. But the mere attempt of British judges, whatever their position or their character, to decide the internal relations of this country, they regard with feelings which Mr. Seward has plainly expressed for them. As to the position which Mr. Seward takes, you will see that it is only that which he took from the beginning, and held without a shadow of variation all through the war. He never allowed himself to be wheedled, or worried, or frightened into concessions which would embarrass the country when the war came to its inevitable ending. The United States Govern- ment, it will be remembered, never at any time, at home or abroad, recognized the very existence of a so-called Confederate Government ; and numberless were the sneers and jeers heaped upon Mr. Seward's head, especially by the London Times, for what was called this ostrich-like folly. But it was steadily persisted in. Even the cartels for the exchange of prisoners were mere military arrangements, such as might be entered into between any two parties of individuals engaged in hostilities. Upon this point in fact, which toaches bonds, as it touched prisoners, turned the whole question at issue. The Government of the United States is not the successor of any other Government, or the conqueror of independent States. It has merely put down certain rebels in arms, and its rights and its responsibilities are now only what they always have been. It would be unwise to act upon the sup- position that it will ever swerve from this position.
A YANKEE.
Previous page
