Richmond daily times. [volume] (Richmond [Va.]) 1850-1853, 1853-05-17
CLAYTON G. COLEMAN. ESQ.


This gentleman, in letter to friend in this
ty, clearly defines his position upon the lead~
~ questions of the day, We invite attention
the following extract from the letter:
Il stated in the discussion between Judge
aske and myself, at the Bowling Greenin Caro-
ne county, on Monday last that my opinions in
S41 were not my opinions in 1858. For up
Yards of ten years l have been the jealous and
ctive advocate OF protective tariff. l have al
Fays been in favor of the distribution of the
ubic lands among the several States of the
Jnou. | have no constitutional impediments 10
citing for appropriations to improve our Rivers
nd Harbors, and had been a member OF the
ast House of Representatives of the Con-
ress of the U. States, would have taken very
treat pleasure in exerting myself to secure
appropriation, sufficient to improve the navi.
sation of James River. Unlike my honorable
competitor, l would have voted for my
amendment, and then for the bill as amended"
D%We learn from the Bedford Sentinel that
he Democratic candidates for that county have
declared themselves in favor of the issue of small
notes, provided they be made redeemable at the
branch banks. Moreover. these gentlemen go
Further and allege thatthis has always been the
position of their party on the subject. We pre-
sumo chat this exposition the Democratic creed
will hardly be accepted by the Democracy in
this quarter Messrs. Brown Goode and Davis
were members of the late Legislature, and they
ought to know the sentiments of their own par
ty; but if any considerable portion of that party
have ever been willing to allow the issue of small
notes by our banks. under any conditions what
ever they have at least prese rved profound ST.
lence and secrecy in regard to the matter. We
rather suspect that our Locofoco friends in Bed
ford are in narrow strait just at this time. The
county is pretty generally admitted to be Wing,
and unless the late Democratic delegates can get
Wing votes. they must inevitably go to the wall.
Hence this convenient modification of Democrat
ic principles to suit the necessities the occasion.
The Democracy regard Mr.. John Goode as one
of their ablest and most reliable champions. And
yet we find this brilliant and promising young
Democrat''-an eector on the Pierce and King
icket-commt:ing himself to an abominable
enet of the Wing party. We venture to say,
however. thut as long Mr.. Goode sticks to the
party. his advocacyot Wing principles will not be
regarded as in the slightest degree vitiating his
Democracy. We subjoin an article from the Sen.
tinel on this topic:
Small Notes.
Tell it not in Gath proclaim it not in the
streets of Ascalon." Brown, and Goode, and
Davis, also, we presume, have sarned complete
somerset upon the question of permitting our
own Banks to issue small notes. In his speech
at last Court, Orator Goode distinctly and em-
phatcally evowed that he had never seen the
day when he would have voted to authorize the
Virginia Banks to issue notes of less denomi.
nation than five dollars. That was his language
without condition and without qualifications
Stick pin there, Wings and Democrats Of the
county of Bedford. Ten days afterwards-lass
Thursday-in speech delivered precisely in
the same place and before nearly the same audi
ence, Orator Goode bold y declared that he was
in favor of the issue of small notes. provided they
were made redeemable at the branch Banks. Is
not this consistency, with vengeance Was
there ever so sudden and Damascus like con-
version upon any public question before Strange
TO saw, Senator Brown, without the fear of Nc
Culloch before his eyes, assumed the same
identical ground. Is not this complete and per-
feet surrender of the whole question on the
part of Goode and Brown? Why labor to prove
tina. Hunters bill will flood the csun-
try with silver. and entirely supercede the ne
cessity of small notes? Why labor to show that
the issue of small notes by our banks will inevita-
bly destroy the certain and salutary effect of
Hunters bill, retard the circulation of silver,
and drive it clean out of the country? Why all
this argument against the issue of small notes, it
you are IN tauor of such measure! Why quote
from the Philadelphia Ledger and the Journal of
Commerce. neutral not Wig paper-and
why read page after page from the writings of Nc
Culloch to prove the impoIicy and the absurdity
of permitting our own banks to issue small notes,
if you mean to give in to a scheme which. accor-
ding to your own logic, is unwise, unjust, impo-
tic, and the necessary tendency of which will be
10 defeat the objects of Hunters bill, obstruct
the circulation of silver, aud perpetuate the evils
Of a shiu-plaster currency2 7 our quasi attitude
upon this grave question may afford you loop
hole of retreat from the unpopular stand you have
heretofore taken in regard to it, but that will be
ALL The public will Judge, as it has right to do
of the motives and reasons actuating to sudden
and radical change of position.
But will the redemption Of Que and two dollar
notes at the Branch Banks cure mitigate the
alIeged evils of small note currency Will no
the same effects follow, matter where thu
notes are redeemabei According to Locofoc'
Iooic. will not the specie be driven out Of circu
Iation. whether they are redeemabe at Lynch
bnro ar Richmond Would the mere fact o
their being redeemable only at the branci
Ranks tend any the less to exclude sll7e
and pod from circu aton than if they wer
redsemable only at the mother Bank :
Would that mere tact draw the silver from -
hiding olaees" and start it into free aud genera
circulation through the entire community!
SO, where is the necessity of Hunters bill