Clarksville chronicle. (Clarksville, Tenn.) 1857-1865, 1859-03-04

Lastweek we con trasted the resolutions Of
the democracy of Ru theriord and klsury to
show The utter want of harmony sstweenI
them, and the restitution Of asy fixed and
uniform principles BY which she party
can be recognized. Now we clip the 9Th
and sixth resolutions of the democracy of
Knox to show rhat the democats Of that
county could not be consistent with them
selves long enough to draft series Of
resolutions and adopt them. The fifth is
in these words: 100 o.
Resolued--That on the subject Of Banks
and rag currency, redoundiDg as they
do TO the interest of the few and the detri-
ment of the many, the Democracy revive
their ancient hostility, believing them 8
perversion of natural aud sound cur
rcncy, destructive Of the best commercial
interest of the county, aud without war
rant in the Fundamental law of the land.
Now this is explicit enough it is dead
out against paper currency and that their
position mag not be misunderstood, it is
expressly stated that the democrats Of
Knox go for a natural currency--a sort
we never heard Of before, but it is mob
rags, for, however common, they are not a
natural product, though cloth naturally
becomes rags--and this may be the dodge
Be this as it may, the resolution is in favor
Of hard currency, as no one can fail to see
But what says the sixth? Here il is:
Resolved-That while we can not inter.
fere with existing laws on the subject of
Banking, we would recommend such ac-
ton on the part of the Legislature of the
State as would secure the ;eople against
losses by any of the existing institutions.
to inhibit their expansion, to enforce an
observance of laws and regulations con-
corning them, and in the future charter
no more institutions for emitting bills of
credit which have not in the custody of the
State coin in their vaults dollar for dollar
There you have it! Two resolutions,
one after the other, containing no less than
two palpable contradictions without set
ting forth single defined principle
First; there is no warrant in the funda-
mental law of the land" for the creation
Of banks. Second; the Legislature is
requested to charter no bank-unless it
has coin equal to issue, 'dollar for dollar"
A bank is a bank, and if the Constitution
sanctions the creation of one that shall
issue dollar for dollar, by what bubble
can it be made to appear that there is no
similar sanction for a bank that shall issue
three for one? The assumption in the
first resolution is ridieulously made void
by the admission in the last We do not
mean to say that this palpable absurdity
is the result Of ignorance on the contrary
it is an evidence of very dishonest Shrewd.
ness. The first position is to be used in
the hills and hollows the last, in localities
where the hard money humbug will not
win.
But, again. The first resolution is
Internationally against "rag currency"
whilst the last admits that "rag currency"
will do, with certain Restrictions. A,bank
note is rag, according to the pl,rase6logy
of the resolution, aud can be nothing but
rag, however restricted And as a
further evidence of the incincerity of de-
mocracy, mark the following language and
the necessary differences ave would re-
commend such action on the part
of the Legislature Of the State as
would secure the people against losses by
any of the existing institutions" And
how2 Simply by enforcing the law. And
what is the inference2 Why, that a
paper currency is perfectly safe, if the law
as enforced, and that the fault is in the
bankers, not in the banks-or, il you
prefer it, in the Legislature that refuses
to revoke a charter when it has been
violated. This is what the language
means, or it is unmeaning nonsense.
But there is yet another rotten plank
in this platform. If the existing banks
occasion loss to the people simply because
they violate the laws, what security is there
that the same result would not follow the
chartering of such banks as the Knox |
democrats recommend? They say that
their banks must deposit with the State,
coin dollar for dollar. But the Free
Banks are now required to deposit State
bonds with the Comptroller, in a given
proportion to their circulation and has
this provision prevented closes to the
people ?" Certainly not. And why p
Because the law has been disregarded, and
the Comptroller has cOnnived at the fraud.
Suppose such deposits were in coin. would