Democratic standard. [volume] (Georgetown, Brown County, Ohio) 1837-1850, 1842-06-14
FROM THE visptcAroR


TIL L HON. THOMAS L. ITAMER.
The spi,eful and lllnaiured denuncia-
fans, which, some protesting to be demo
crsts. ure disposed to heap upon this india
yidual canEo. have their. origin in any
genuine affection for the pure principles
Of demoerncy, OF in a2Y apprehension of
danger TO those principles from his sup
posed- detection. Some otiIer unknown
and undefnable motive, must best lhe
Bottom oftliis VICIOUS spirit, giving It i'm
pulse aud bitterness. Ii there existed
any thing in the position of Mr.. Hamer,
which by any reasonable construction
could be rendered adverse to the true
principles Of democracy, as understood
and defined by its ablest apostles, the wri-
ter Of this article, would be the very last
10 uphold him, or approve his course. -
The writer has seen Mr. Hamer's recent
letter 10 the Ohio Eagle, and after care
full perusal thereof, is constrained to say
that there is not single sentiment ad-
vanced, or principle inculcated, that is
not purely democratic, and which he does
not WDony dppoNO'
Mr.. IIamer, however widely, he may
differ from some its members, does not,
differ with his party lie differs with a
portion of the democracy only in the ul.
raism Of their views, and the Tadyal ten-a
dency of their designs The great ma.
iority of the party are in favor ofbank re-
form, they nre opposed to a system which
from long experience has shown only that
willie Il favored the bankers alone, was
not safe for the people, and did notafford
CURRENCY always convertible into specie.
None but destructives, those who are gll-
ded alone by passion, and over whom we
are icclined 10 think reason has no con-
troll, have ever contemplated an entire,
complete and annihilattng demolition Of
all banks. Surely the democracy, as
parry, have never sanctioned such cut.
throat policy. The most we have ever
wanted, was REFoRMg This our Wing OPP
ponents, who owned and controlled the
banks have always denied us. The issue
never was, and we trust never will be,
the unrestricted, unqualified question Of
1blnks or no banks.'' Mr. Hamer's OBJ
iect is not, as some, lave ungeaeFously
supposed, to DISTRACT the party, but.to
strengthen, elevate and dignity itgby pla-
cling lis principles in their true light, be-
fore the public, by redeeming 10 from
Tho odium which few destructives have
cast upon Il. Instead of denunciations,
he deserves the gratitude Of every sensi-
bic democrat.
The West -unionJresoIution declale in
favor of a system Of banking which would
.sdford d fair profit to the bankers--be
pcTi.fectly i safe 70 the people-dnd fara a
ish a currency at all times cOnDertibte into
cold aud siIseF, at the tciH o fthe holder. = !
What more could any reasonable demo.
era; desiree- whatmore does the interest
ot the public require? The desiderainul
or rdemocracy on the subject Of banking,
has always been system which would 0e
safe 10 the people, and convertible al the
,cSll of the kSlderin specie; and is u any
thing more than right and proper, that .
system which affords these desirable ends
should also afford fair profit to- the bGak-
Fer. Would youiuse the capital, require
the services Of the banker, and pay him
Enoihing iorlthema II may be part Of the
Iipriuciples Of the eDEsrRUcFIvEs, TO do SO,
| but tlereis no honesty orfairnessin it.--
One prominent object ofithe great demo-
cratic party, has been 10 efecta salntarg
reform in ,he banking policy Of the coun.
lry; that reform aimed at the very ends
described inihe West Union resolutions.
| 1t did not propose 10 destroy all banks,
but q restrict, remodel and reform them