Edgefield advertiser. [volume] (Edgefield, S.C.) 1836-current, 1840-08-06
Letter Of R. NJ. II. HUNTER, TO his Con
stiiuents. Washington, June ~,

StiuentS. Washington, June ~,
1910.
GEsrLmEy: have received several
Ier,ers from friends, who desire to know
nv opinions upon the Presidential ques-
,inn. and who inquire into the truth of the
report thai shall not I've a candidate inr
reelection. As have not time To reply
to these letters severally, beg leave to
make general aud public response to
them all.
The relation bear 10 you will justify
me. trust. in hereafter addressing YOU
more at length upon the present state ol
parties, and my course III regard to them.
For the present, must content myself
with a reply to The heterogeneous pro
pounded to me as brief as is consistent
with clear exposure of INV opinions.
| have taken no part in the Presidential
canvass, because | do uuI approve Of eth
erof the candidates. claim to be re
nnbl,can oflhe old Virginia school. and ] do
no, recognise either General Harrison or
MIR. Van Buren, as an exponent Of its
principles. -,
No one supposes, presume. that any
candidate who held the opinions of either
of them, could stand three days canvass
for Congress in any republican district IN
Virginia. understand both As having
approved tn: Proclamation aud Force
bill. believe both to he in favor ni Il
protective Tariff. General Harrison sup
ported this policy IN resolutions introduced
into the Ohio Legislature. antl in public
declarations; and Mr.. Van Buren, voted
not only for the Tariff Of 1923. when he was
instructed. hut also fnr that of 1924, VIXEN
he was under no such obligation.
Both are committed IhIuk, To the
power Of the General Government over
the suhjec, of Internal Improvement; hut
General Harrison The more deeply of the
two He helieve, voted for the system
i'm all It's forms: aud. although Mr.. Van
Bureu often voted against such measures
in The Senale, yet he did not always do
So: and he has signed bills as President
which, IN my opinion, involve the princi.
ple. Such are The Cumberland Boad bill,
and the Harbnr bill of 1898.
refer here NOT only TO The general poll
CIV Of the latter bill. hui 10 particular
items which it contains. In It's general
bearing it is liable. ] telieve, TO all the oh.
jections which apply to any other system
Of Internal improvements. IL we have
the power To construct harhors for com
mercial, or for other han naval purposes
do not see why We may not make roads
and canals also.
But thus bill contained an item for thu
inprny ement nf the Hudson river abuvt
aud below the por of Albany. Now, lhi>
would be embraced even within tie Iini.
ted negative placed upon the system in the
Maysvile veto. if understand The prnci.
pleo the Message.
Upon the Currency question, however
there is a marked difference in their opin.
ions. General Harrison will sign bi
for United States Bank. should Con
sress pass il; whilst Mr.. Van Buren, wcult
no, only veto such Il charter, but advo
Gates what is commonly known as the
Sub-Treasury system. 1t may he ask
ed, Why, then. will you moi vote ("l
him, as he agrees with you on lha, i'm.
portant measure? In fiscal point o
view, no one desires More earnestly than
myself an entire separation between thi.
Government and banks of issue. Nor
when viewed in its political aspect, am
behind any in the wish To divorce the pow.
er oil the banks from the patronage of thi.
Government. Bu! what avails the Sub,
Treasury, in this latter point of view, il
we are to subject the State banks to tht
control OF This Government, under the
form of "A bank law-hunlreds of State
banks would thus be placed under thu
power of the General Government, aud. il
certain contingencies, hundreds otmiIion.
in money would be administered by leder
al agents. What sort OF divorce is tha
which makes the Stale banks dcpenden
upon tins Government for their very eX
istence, and which bject them 10 It's reg
ulation!
And yet the President recommended, il
1897, a uniform law concerning bankrupt