The Davenport daily gazette. [volume] (Davenport, Iowa) 1856-1869, 1857-07-21
ARTICLE VIII.
ponATIuae

CORPORATIONS.
This article excitcs the chief opposition TO
the new constitution. Ii embodies the
great issue presented in that instrument.
We will examine IL. and the objections 20 H..
briefly
The present constitution prohibit, THE ere
alton OF any corporate body with the rrisi
lego OF making, issuing or putting in cirrula-
tion any paper, rs money.
The new constitution permits the General
Assembly, to pas banking laws, but they
cannot take effect until approved by vote
~ the people
The present constitution prohibits the
people, even II they shoud desire il, from
procuring the enactment Ut any banking
system whatever Tile new constitution
'ncrel. gives them al opportunity 81 voting
far. or against SUCH a system. IL submitted
D, the legislature
This article on corporations .i.ss hat
make IL imperative on the legislature to pre-
-cnt system IL banking il onl, permits
tlem u d. -. AMI then before taking ril'.et,
IT must receive the popular approval.
We should be- pleased tukitpw W lat j. at.t-
= Democratic in this.
The people are worthy u hrins trusted
with the decision 1T far NOR. important
quest on than hat II banking and wr can
not understand lis they may not pass up
ON matter 81 vitality rilceting their inter
.sts.
4 few presses in their zeal 81 want II
discretion, have rails Il the cry ii 'hard nia.l-
| ey,' and an exclusive metallic currency,
and attempt 10 show that thi> i the dee.
trine Of the dc nocra,ic party
II may be psoper a. notice tlls position.
We know NJ but the Bem0cratir party
might favor .xtii.sivc me,alic currency.
Il It were PRACTICABLE Every ns,lligsat
observer must know that III the present tx
igcnces OF trade, paper money has become
inexiricably a.sociated with the business oi
the country.
IL may be al evil, but II Is a necessary
/ one.
". doubt " neither the Democrats, party
ever raised IN State, except in Ohio, the
ilag oi "hard money" aai evea there, al
Trough IN a decided majority in the con
s,itutional convention, they failed to en-
body their doctrines in the constitution.
Every Daorrafie State in the Union; ex.
crpt Iowa and California La constitution
al permission II banking
Many II the most prominent and iniluen
tial Democrats 81 TIN State. are engaged iii
the active circulation Of paper, as money .
! These gentlemen would certainly not be
concerned IN spreading the .blghting intin-
enee, II paper money among the people,
u II were - great an evil a. tue metallic
! prcsse confidently assert. They retain to-.
+ their position. a. leaiin. i,.en Il tie Demo.
cratic party, notwit standing lhe odiam
! that the hard none, editors would At
'ach u the business u paper money bank
NJ
The attempts 20 make hard inoney
y tty issue, Is the l.ight u folly. II l.
Who'll; iMpra.ticable 10 get rid OF . paper
currency. ii We desired 10 do ~. We ar.
surrounded with tana,, AMI our Stale Il in
undated with paper money. Iowa Is called
hard money Stat and her prosperity l.
aserihed 20 that fact lLss she been NOR.
prosperous than Him or Wisconsin. both
Of which States authorize banking But 10
s..c hard money State l. she not a c,.m.
nlpa field Tor the circulation Il shaplasters.
Nebraska, Perth Amboy Rhode Island Cen.
| trail, ac., Aei Are not some &c her cit.rs
ana We regret under .hard money author.
tics, issuing shinpla,ters, in open violation
OF the const!tutionl IL il a common re-
! marx that Iowa has the worst currency il
| ia. mon, and yet we arc compiacently
told SIC Is ..hard money STATE
Ii may have been. that nj the asisuttgua g
! the present constitution iae want III the
State did not demand currency If her own.
but this IL no evidence that IL /. MT seaul
,i,r nov. Her trade has increased =, lat-.
~, that she Is now tributary 10 nearl, ,ery
State IN the Mon for banking facilities, and
/ Il i a well known fact. which cannot Il.
/ disguised. that desire IA remove the pro-
h'hitory claus. IN reear, To banking, con
4 tanned IN the present constitution, was one
/ oi the chief causes for calling the late CON
+ stitutional convention.
In connection with thir, II may be pror~r
I a. say, thar We are in possession uf iniorma
/ ton from democratic member If the con
ssitutonal convention wniea states. that the
| democratic delegates held caucus in refer
cnce 10 their proper course ON the question
u banking, etc, AMI although large INA
joritv represented themselves ~ thaoreti-
cally " hard money m.n,a Yet that their
constituents expected the clause, contained
in the prgnt constitution prohibiting ans
banking system, would BE- removed, ami
that the people might, at least, have an OPP
portnnity of deciding the question Tor them
selves.
In view of thi, public opinion they acted.
and but four yolcd in favor II total prohi.
bition Of all banking within the State.
The general features Of the article on COR
.orations, in relation to the creation OF
hanks, individual liability. drpositing Of
sto <. arr copied ir,m the Democrptic con
stitutions Of Ohio, Indiana and Michigan.
II Is said that the article on corporations,
10 20 restrictive that no banking system can
be established under il.
This i strange objection to cone from