Wilmington journal. [volume] (Wilmington, N.C.) 1844-1895, 1857-04-17
THE WILMINGTON JOURNAL,
W1LMINGToN, n. c., MONDAY. APRIL 10. 1857.
10 AT Democratic meeting recently held in Raj

nue. with the States, as choice OF evils 1t was d
disagTeeable necessity, but one which he inoognt
preferable 10 leaving this surplus in the treasury 20
breed corruption and extravaganza. These may not
be- and indeed are not the precise WORDS put we 1ee
assured that they convey the meaning OF the Ian
Ouage attributed to Mr. Branch, as We also feel that
in using them Mr. Branch spoke in accordance with
his character, in all honesty and manly sincerity and
indicated the reasons which prompted the North Car
DINA and few of the Virginia delegation 10 break
off from the body of the Democratic party on this
question of deposit. These gentlemen, no doubt be.
leVed they were yielding TO painful necessity and
doing the best they could under the Circumstances
Such reasoning, permit US TO say had no weign win
the Senate and President last FALL when the very
wheels of government were threatened TO De Storpeo
and when theseIgentemen themselves stood up to their
poslsvlke men and applauded the frmness OF those
recognized no painful necessities compelling any abb
negation of principle even in appearance.
To show how the Democratic party as party
stood upon this question, let look at the following
votes -First-the original "a Democrats OF the last
Congress, who voted for Richardson and against
Banks. They were follows
For Mr.. observation-disclosures. Aiken, Allen, Barclay,
BaAB arn BsyE SS
Howell Cobb, Williamson R: W. Cobb, Crage, Crawford
DenV DOwd FUr Good
Augustus Hall, Sampson W. Harris Thomas l. Harris
Herbert Ks9 xs eHEge Umpi
Samuel S. Marshall, Maxwell, McMullin, MCQUEEN Smth
Miller, Milson, Mordecai Oliver Orr, fheips
smith. William smith, Stephens Stewart Talbot, Tay
Tor, Vail Warner, Watkins, Wells, WinSlOw and John v
Wight-74.
Of these. the following gentlemen voted for Mr.
Campbelps bill
Faulkner, Kelly McMulin MIson, Rudn, William Smith,
Stewart, Winslow-l4.
That is to say, IA out of "a.
We put this on record SO as 10 place ourselves and
our own position fairly before the Democratic party
on this subject and to show that the Democratic
party, as pary-that is to say, nearly five slxhs OF
it-agree with US in not going for Mr.. Campbe Is
ill.
We know that the authority and example OF Mr.
Calhoun is relied upon to support this distribution by
deposit Now, if there be State in the Union that
REFERENCES the memory and abides by the matured
views of Mr. Calhoun, that State is South Carolina,
and yet no vote from that State is found recorded for
Mr. Canpbers bill b.! Not one!
Indeed, there appears TO be some strange contra
rietV about this matter. In 1885, Mr. Calhoun made
or drew up report with reference to the disposal Of
a supposed surplus likely 10 be in the Treasury
That report after asserting the absolute certainty that
there would be such surplus, and speakng OF some
mode of investing said surplus, deprecates such mooe
of investment as would create the dangerous relation
# debtor and creditor between the government and
the members OF the Union. A powerful argument
IL 1v
dangerous relation
The whole deposit affair of 1886 was based upon
supposed necessity from which there was no legtl'
mate escape That supposed necessity arose from the
Tariff Compromise of 1888, which had several years
to rum and which, it taken for granted could not
he nterfered WITH while it was also taken for gran
ted that it would enevtaby throw into the Treasury
surplus of 100000 per annum for eight years. be-
fore its operation could result in bringing the coec-
lions within the limit of the legitimate expenses OF
the government. This view was totally falIacious.
The not long after sunk 10 such point that
the Treasury was bankrupt and borrower at dis
count and the scheme itself was fully carried
out Abortive as this deposit affair was, it had at
least supposed necessity 10 fall back upon that did
not exist in 1857. There was no fixed Compromise
Tariff, with supposed immunity from interference
in 1857. There was an easy way to get rid of any
surplus by simply ceasing to take money out OF the
pockets of the people. The cases are not parallel
nor can the one rest upon the authority OF the other
even supposing the other to possess any authority,
which it does not.
So fully convinced was Mr.. Calhoun in 1885 Of
The unconstutonality of distributing the funds OF
the government that he proposed an amendment OF
the constitution for eight years to permit of the dis
rbution of the surplus which, according to his view
must arise during that period of time under the oper"
alton of the Tariff Compromise of 1888. Nothing
was done in 1895.
When in 1886 bill to distribute the Iandrevenue
passed the Senate but failed in the House, the diff
Guilty was got over BY Matching up "a bill to deposit
the money instead of give it, and thus gentlemen o
the best principles Inadvertently allowed themselves
to be taken in by change of name and lend thei
sanction under this change of name TO the Thing they
had consistently opposed previously. Hon. James J
Mckay of the Cape Fear district was not of these
No, nor Frank. Pierce. Many good men were, we ad
nit.
Among certain class of persons interested in Stat
securities, the assumption of the debts of the State
by the General Government had long been favorit
idea, working sort of merger of the States into tn
Union like counties into State. This could not b.
done directly, but it might be done Indirectly, BY
means of the United States collecting vast from
the people, and distributing the money taken from
the people, to The State governments-thus reduced
in effect from their sovereign position into that
benefciaries or debtors of vast central powerr A
the same time, the manufacturers of the North, clam
crous for high tariff, by of which they coult
squeeze the South and West like sponges, hailed an!