Burlington free press. [volume] (Burlington, Vt.) 1827-1865, 1840-04-03
FRIDAY, APRIL 3, 1910.


which he has read and considers the foundation
ofunJust remark elsewhere, as an important or
material portion of his reasoning. Such is the
doctrine contained in the printed speech 1t is be-
fore the world, and let them see whether have
brought the member nearer TO being friend OF
hard money than he brings himself
But the Senator pointed out two paragraphs in
my reply which he says do him injustice. If so,
it was not my purpose. On the first page, he al
eges that, in general summary which make,
mot OF his exclusive views, as the paragraph
shows) impute to him an opinion that the sub
Treasury Will have greater influence over banks
and banking, and reduce the currency beyond
what he ever thought or has contended it would
do, notwithstanding expressly state, in another
place, when ! speak ofhim alone that he declares
himself the friend of well-regulated banks and
mixed currency. On this point, shall only say it
is the last on which could have anticipated COM
plant, after all the reasoning of the Senator TO
prove the exnHliency of reducing the currency,
because Of the evils of banking. But the elect Of
the bill is matter that never entered my mind as of
any moment. 1t was not the measure of influence
which ii would have that discussed, or thought
Important, as alluded to it only in a summary
way. 1t was the opinions and doctrines advanced
in the argument, the general scope Of policy advo-
Gated by the member, upon which | commenced,
and to which replied. I could not misunderstood
HIM in expressing the opinion that the bill would
have It's influence as corrective, and am in
ascribedto ii.
The Senator laid hold of another isolated para
graph of my reply at the thirteenth page, and sup
poses that meant TO assert that he and his friend
| conended that the bill would reduce the value OF
property and wages one half | assured him the
other day, and now do it again, that such is not
my meaning, nor does 1t TO me TO he the ,ist
or fair construction of the language The language
is this: 81 do not imputc this power to the b,
but it is enough for me that its friends do" What
power? He alleges the power to reduce wages
and property one half. say the power 10 reduce
wages and property, and to improve our relat IONS
TO foreign trade, without assigning any particular
| proportion of reduction. The Senator draws the
! proportion from hypothetical case stated by me
in illustration Of the general proposition under
| consideration, that a reduction of wages would lie
| beneficial to the laborer. THIS comhat,ed and IN
| the hypo,hesi, assumed a case in which wages
were supposed TO be reduced one half. Having
| gone through with this, which appears on the
face of it 10 be, what it is, hypothetical, and moi
| founded on propositions intended 10 be imputed &c
any one as used in argument, return by new
paragraph to the bill, and use the language have
read not intending to refer to the hypothesis, OF
| the proportion of reduction init, but to the genera
| proportion under consideration. He therefore
| gives meaning TO my remarks never designed Of
thought Of by ME until heard his construction
He does not read the speech as understand it, ant
meant it should be understood This explanation
| IL tIlc SAME gave tHc OtHcr uay, anu ~ villa
the Senator called a disclaimer. Ii is disclaime
ofnothing but his construction Of my language an,
meaning lfthat is what he meant by disclaim
er, | am content with it, but wish to he rightly
understood If you take the paragraphs alon
which the Senator read it may lie understood a
he represents; but that is not the inference as
appears TO Inc from the whole text
But the Senator went further, and read from m,
speech the next sentence, which is, "What res
ponse will the farmers, mechanics, and ma n,
turers make to such hagitious proposition = an
sezng upon the word hagitiolS, used in no sens
Extensively, not having the remotest personal ap
pcauon to him, but applied to the general propo
>ition to reduce wages, &C. and not to the hypo
thesis or any thing contained in it, inquiries 9th
Senate if he might not pronounce this statement
tiagitiouS representation OF his remarks | wis
hun now to state whether IN employing that Ian
Suage he meant TO reflect on Inc personally? M
d. paused a moment, and the Senator not maxim
an answer,) he added, If he did, then hur BAG
the imputatlon whit the >corn and contempt Ian
guage so unmerited and unprovoked deserves, an
suspend further remarks till hear the member.