Richmond enquirer. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1815-1867, 1842-12-10
POLITICAL.
CFrcm ne ". j. Ereatag PoN.J
!. r'rl'ER FROM MIR. GUSHING.

Tx 81
My attention has just been called TO the following
article IN the Post OF 3nlh November, viz
"a ScuruE OF FiSANoE On our first page WILDE
found scheme for he custody OF the national revenue,
which has been drawn BY person OF great sdsacit
IN such matters and u which we invite the dispas-
soDate attention OF our readers.
Itis in substance an independ dent Treasury, scheme
for keeping the public money without the ad oil balHs,
10 which added authority 10 receive deposiieS OF
COIN and give certificates, payable either al The office
where they mad, or at an Office, snb'ifsasury
Won NAV call II, IN another part of the Union. The
usn is we'll dges;ed severely simple IN ts proyisions
and accom- panied by planatIonS which Show clear
and intimate knowledge of the subject OF finance
ave happen to kno" that ihiS scheme was last sum
mer communicated 10 the principal men o! the wing
party in Congress Mr. Gushing, IN the House OF Re
oresentatves took ii tor the basis OF their plans bot
both engra(lcd upon 1t features which made II con
triyance for expanding the currency, and borrowing
Inoney f,o Geposlors What was good IN Their plans
and reports. taken, oar readers can now Sec
from this plan and ihe commentary OF lis auihor-what
was bad, their own.
1.-THE system proposed h The author oil the plan we
PUBLISH differs from theirs in keeping the deposites
sacred and untouched for those who make them, until
the certificates redeemed and IN containing no
principle by which the amount oil paper tokens can
possibly exceed The amount Of coin actually on hand,
and ready for their redemption. II offers plan OF de-
pose for which is never TO De used BY the 10.
yefnment except TO be restored to the depostor, aud
the paper merely The evidence oi his lille
10 The CON he has deposited
"The convenience OF the scheme if rigidly pursued,
without departure from lis street PROVISIONS, and N
spirit Of scrupulouS fidelity 10 rs object, - manifest
This article contains several errors Of fact in regard
TO the plans Of Ex Gu, qces, pending IN The two
Houses of Congress. tspeass only of the bill reported
by the Committee of the iiouss Of representatives,
and that reason, refer IN the following eApldna
lions only 10 the bill of the House. But the exPiana
lions apply, IN part, 10 MI laiiEa0Se oi as "sHa
10 mine
the Post specifies two material points, in which it
is alleged the plan Of ''Frankin differs from NINE,
and differs the disadvantage OF the latter These
imputed differences said 10 be:
/. Gin keeping the deposes sacred and untouched
for those who make them until the certificates re-
deemed.
2 "in containing ~ principle by which the amount
OF paper tokens can possible exceed the amount Of coin
actually on hand, and ready for their redemption.
In imputjng these differences between the plan Of
"Fsank!in'' and that winch hears my NAME the Post
;mpedy asserts that the House bill does not "keea
the depostes sacred aud untouched Tor those VINO make
shem" Sc and that the House bill doeS not limit "ihe
amount of name, tokens to ',he oil coin actu
ally on hand.
in each of these particulars the implied assertion is
srronenrs The House bill does not percmptoril: ard
under the strongest penal sanctions require the depo
sites TO be kept saered and untouched for those who
make them. unit, tie certificates ale redeemed. And
The House bill does nct Certain any prncple ny which
the amount of paper tokens can possibly exceed The
amount of coin actually Oh hand and ready Tor their
,edemptiun" but on the contrary, it expressly and
oositirelv restricts the aorn Of paper issued to the
amount OF coin actually hand aud ready tor lis 'e
Gemphon.
The Pos, goes on 10 say, that the plan OF ''Frankn
proposes s'depositc of that IS never 10 be used
Oy the Government except 10 lie restored 70 the depo-
sor and the paper he receives is merely the evidence
of his title 10 the coin he has deposited.
II would seem 10 be implied, by the context, that IA
this particular also The House bill differs from the plan
of "Frankln" and differs disadvan,ageously. If 50,
here also is another error for according to the plan OF
she House BILL the coin deposited by an individual can
never be used by the Government; and the piper which
the depostor receives merely the evidence OF his
,itie 10 the coin he has deposited
The Post instly cnmmends the plan Of s'Frankn,
because of these its leading provisions trust, there
fore That the Post "a journal whose op,nons are en-
.ed 10 respect, and have ntueace} Will, on inspect
ing the House bill and percciyng that the House bli
contains precisely the PROVISIONS, yield ITS nprro
baton that hi, @id promote lis adoption by Con-
gress.
The Post says, in another part of the article, that
nv bin has features which made IT contrvance Tor
expanding the currency, and borrowing money from
aepositors This is There arc no such
features IN nv b hut, the contrary, IL confines
che issue to dollar for dollar, and utterly excluding
borrowing, either by or from Inc government, as re-
spects depositors.
In word, | adopt and concur in the very thing
which the Post approves, az features OF the plan OF
ssFranklin" You vii! find them all developed and
maintained in the report which presented 10 the
House, accompanying the bi!l.
The Post further says, that "@hat was good" in the
plans and reports presented to Congress, was taken
from the plan Of "Frauklin, and the commentary Of
ais author; sswhat was bad, was their own.
This is very summary well rs epigrammaiic.
respectfully ask you consider this pointed ccndemna
ton Of the hills before Congress, as compared with Tie
plan of "Frankiin
have no pride OF authorship in regard 10 the bill
which reported The House and so tar as it's pro.
per for me to refer 10 the private history Of the bill,
desire the pnhc to know, that special and primary
credit that respect is due TO Mr. Wise, another mem
Der Of the committee.
do not desire to delrac,, in any degree, from the
merit or the originality OF "Vranhlns' conceptions
Tae identity Of principle in certain respects, between
his plan and that Of The House, tends 10 conhrm the
ruth OF the conclusions 10 which bath " Franklin
and the Housc committee have arrived But II rs an
error 10 assume that the committee TOOK It's plan ircn
"Franklin." | say or myself and believe For
MIR Wise. f not FOX other members OF the committee,
shat the leading features Of the House li were IN our
minds long before | had any knowledge Of the plan Of
'FIauklin." ! en-, very respectfully.
{. CUSHING.
Aston House, Cd Dec, 1872.
Correspondents, u tie Naisor:aH.