Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1853-03-30

We learn from the New York Tribune that
tie Democracy of the Ohio Legislature lately
resolved to establish Sub Treasury system for
that State. bill was accordingly concocted for
this purpose, but ,Oithout the hard money fea-
tue. The revenues of the State were to be col
lected before, in bank notes, but special agents
We're to be appointed to keep and disburse these
notes. The Tribune goes to say:
The Wings united with the few earnest Hard
Money men 10 saying and voting that, if Sub
Treasury were to be created at all, it should be
the real artice-its contents real gold, and not
thinly galvanized brass. Bat they were voted
down by the regulars, and only sham Sub-Trea-
sury scheme matured. Even this the leaders
did not venture to pass, but let it fail some
pretext OF disagreement between the two Houses;
SO the States Finances are to 90 on as before
the Revenue collected in Bank notes, deposited in
Banks, and dsbursed in their paper issues jus, as
under Bank Wing domination. Can they who
do this wonder that we think they don't really
believe in the Snb-Treasury system one whit
more than we do!
The Democratic party have denounced Banks
and Soft Money without intermission for the last
twenty years. During that period they have
| enjoyed uncontrolled sway in majority of the
States of this Union, and might easily have di-.
vorced the governments those States from banking
corporations had they desired to effect the sepura-
ton. But nowhere have they ever made any So
rious effort to accomplish this object, and thus
to carry out their professed principles to their
Legitimate length. iii be right and proper that
the Federal Government should collect and dis
burse its revenues in specie and dispense with the
agency of banks in carrying on these operations.
| - IL @
same system This question has often been
propounded to Democratic economists, but we
have never yet heard satisfactory answer there
to. Our opponents aver that all connection be-
tween the federal treasury and banking institu-
tions is in the highest degree impolitic, criminal
and demorasing, and should not be tolerated for
a moment; but they entertain no sort of objec-
ton to alliances between State Governments
and Banks. Wherein consists the difference =
By what process of reasoning can it be shown
that this connexion is wiser OF more reputable in
| the one than in the other?
Notwithstanding the camor against bank cor
poratons, habitually INDUCED in by the Demo-
cratic party, these institutions have always
Aourshed aud multiplied under Democratic To-
gisation. The Democracy profess to be hard
money and corporation-hating party, and yet we
venture to affirm that no less than two-thirds OF
the banks established and two thirds of the paper
money issued in this country during the last ff-
teen or eighteen years, have been brought into
existence by Democratic Legislators. These
consistent gentlemen abuse paper money, and
yet they go on chartering new banks every day.
| They eulogise the Independent Treasury and
yet they refuse to apply its principles to the
revenue system of their respective States. Not
withstanding all that has been said about divor-
cling government from banks, there is not n De-
mocratic State in the Union that does not con-
tinue to employ these institutions to collect, keep
| and disburse its revenues.