Middletown transcript., 1874-06-13

understanding that every battery would hence
forth be turned against the common enemy
these and more will he so much better described
by Mr. Reynolds than can explain them, that |
shall forbear making the attempt.
| There is one subject, however, in connection
with that really pleasant meeting that shall beg
for space TO discuss, briefly. The motion to in
definitely postpone the 4th article of the platform
| reported by the committee was made by gen.
tleman for whom | entertain the highest respect.
am fully conscious Of his well-deserved reputa-
| tion for honor and honesty. | nm, also, well
aware of the great extent and remarkable accu-
racy Of his information, and of the maturity and
soundness of his judgment; but am constrained,
nevertheless, TO question the correctness of his
conclusions upon that important subject.
The 4th Article simply demands go the repeal
of the tax, by the U. S. Government, upon the
circulation of the banks of the States" Against
its adoption, my friend urged the single objec-
ton that he did not wish the Democratic Party
to be committed to the doctrine of issuing pa
per money by banks chartered by the State. Did
he mean to intimate that the idea of that article
is a novelty, and that the advocacy of it involves
II ''new departure Certainly he could not;
but how else can his objection apply? Would
the charerng of banks by the State, now or in
the future, be the inception and Inauguration of
that practice? 1t is sufficient to PROFOUND the
question, simply. No reply is required for
cry 10 year old boy is ready with the answer
/ WHICH HIS OWN experience suggests. From an
early period in the history of our countryside
| fore and since the Revolution-till 1860, banks
were chartered by The States without exception,
! believe. Were those charters granted only by
administrations of the State Governments, by
parties opposed TO the Democratic Party2 Ger
| tainly not Is it true, then, that even to advo-
cate the chartering OF banks by States would be
| TO commit the Democratic Party to ne,c doc
! trine? Why, maniestly and certainly not
How, then, can the advocacy of the repeal of an
odious, unconstitutional proh.oitory tax upon
the circulation of banks already in being-banks
which were, in fact, chartered by Democratic
Legislatures, ard are older than the Radical par
| ty-he to commit the Democratic party TO that
doctrine, or practice?
The banks, as have said, were long in exist
ence. They had been regularly and properly
chartered, had paid for their charters and rights
had vested under them. Moreover, they furnish
ed a good circulating medium, redeemable in
specie. They might restore to us that redeemable
currency; but here stands the u S. Government
with prohibitory tax of Y per cent. which is
as potent to restrain the action of banks of the
States, as if they had been abolished by statute
The Government Of the United States, in the
hands of the Radicals, did by ndrection that
which it did not dare to do directly. In its
strides towards Capitalization, concentration and
despotlsm, 1t grasped the money power, and eff
tectively strangled and paralized the State banks
Knowing it could not abolish them, it neverthe-
less produced in the State banks state of as
phy1ia. This fragrant violation of the
rights OF the States as advocated in the lSt Ar
tcle Of our platform, which, to have injured to
, accomplish in other times and circumstances
than those in which it was effected would have
provoked revolution.
Livery intelligent man knows, | suppose, that
the Radical Party, during the last fourteen years,
have ridden rough-shod over laws and constitl-
tons; and surely there was not one of the num-
erous powers which they usurpcd, that gave such
t,hUt
verting the governments which were established
by our fathers, as that now under discussion. -
With their grasp upon the money bags they bid
: defiance 10 constitutions, and ruthlessy throtled
States and peoples. And now, when the indica-
tions are favorable to IL return to the good old
paths; when the frenzy, which, engendered by
u , war. ruled the hour, is succumbing to cooler,
calmer judgment; when passion is suhsiding and
reason seems 10 he about to assert her mdei
: sway; is it, can il be, undemocratic to demand
the restoration to the States Of a right? Never
= never!
T. 1t is not a PROPOSAL remember, to launch upor
i new and unknown seas but an earnest, lauda
e ble patriotic effort to steer the old Ship of Stat,
back into oit-tried and thoroughly mapped chan
u nels 1t is an effort, indeed, TO re-establish th'
!, old and well-defned Democratic limitations be
u tween Federal and State powers. The 4th Arti
! Gle does not in fact Commit any party or per
e son, either expressly or implicitly, to any theory
p OF banking whatever 1t simply says to the U
ie 5. Government, 'tstand back and keep YOUR in
: trusive hands out of State affairs" 7,
J, commit the Democratic Party-forsooth !
y Why that glorious old party was committed !
Il TO the doctrine and practice of charerng banks
! by the States, before my friend his father be
III fore him WAS born.
lhavcnotattempted to lay BARE as mighthav
y, done, the impolicy Of this prohibito,y tax, bu
"a have simply sought to show lis inconssienc
~ and antagonsm with Democratic, State Right
I doctrine and practice. 1t would be easy 10 sho,
T. that great and decided relief in these times
distress might be effected, which under the com
ie hined operation of the niqutous National Bank
u ing System and this unconstitutional tax canno
~ be afforded.
Suppose, for example, that the Citizens Ma
tional Bank of Middletown had $50, 600 in go
> in its vault, and could ISSUE as in ante Jeliai
u times, $l20, 900 or more in notes. thus giving I
~ your people both an abundant and il redeemabl
10 currency would it not ease matters with yo
VI very greatly? But there staues the U. S. Gov
ernment, i'll the exercise of usurped power wit
u. AN unconstitutional prohibtory tax, and say
rs you shall not do it. Thus the United State
ef violates right Of tho State of Delaware, and vii
tually depryes her banks of their charters, an
p robs her people of vested rights. And in III
y present dilemma neither gives relief herself, NO
permits the States or the people TO help then
~ selves.
n have sought this opportunity 10 briefly pr,
n sent these views, because they did not seem
n strike the minds Of the speakers, on Saturda,
as with their full force.
p. Every reader of the papers must know til;
IT, both of our Senators have recently presented
n, the Senate of the United States, memorials f
IS the repeal of this obnoxious tax from citizens