Fayetteville observer. [volume] (Fayetteville, Tenn.) 1850-1966, 1875-08-12
The Ohio Campaign.

| y
ernatorial campaign. The ex-
tracts give the gist of old
Bills views on what has been
so fippantlys styled the rag-mon-
ey platform of the Ohio Democ-
racy. 1t will be seen that he
speaks to the point and in the
interest of the people of the
South and West:
But these gentlemen who are
making such a hue and cry a.
bout rag money have no word
Of depreciation for the two thou
sand National Banks, to which
we pay twenty millions of dol
lars per year for the blessed IA
vOr of furnishing us a currency.
And what kind of currency
do they furnish us? Is it not a
rag currency? Is it not made
out Of the same material out of
which greenbacks are construc-
ted, and is it not redeemable in
greenbacks? Then why is this
species of rag money better
than the greenback. and why
should we pay this enor-
nous sum every year for the
privilege of having a currency
redeemable in greenbacks, when
we can have the greenbacks
themselves and save our twenty
millions of dollars? If we
could hear the clink of the coin
on the counter when we pass a
National bank bill to its maker
for redemption, there would be
a distinction with a difference
between the two kinds of mon
ey. But when the National
rag is only redeemable with
a greenback rag, and the faith
and prosperity of this great !
government is pledged to re-
deem the greenback, it seems to |
me that the greenback is the |
preferable, as it is certainly the |
cheapest currency. To call the |
greenback a worthless and all |
irredeemable currency is to i'm
puSh the honor and credit Of
the government. Upon the face
of each note is printed, '"The
United States wiIlpay the bearer
--dollars." 1t does not say
when it will pay it, as it does in
its interest-bearing bonds, but
it nevertheless solemnIy prom
ises to pay the amount.
The matter Of the payment
of either of the series of the in
terest-bearIng bonds rests en-
tirely upon the honor Of the
There is no pow
er under heaven to compel the
of any Of our bonds if
the Government declines to do
so. Therefore, what right have
the Republicans to say that the
Government will pay one class
of its honestly contracted in
debtedness and refuse to pay
another? The obligations of
this Government will all be paid.
The people will not ALLOW re-
pudiation in any shape. Their
moral sense revolts at the idea.
But, say our Republican friends,
you Democratshave a hard mon
ey record. How can you be for
rag money now? [ can say to
them that circumstances change
politics. When we were hard
party, hard money was
possible, and it was for the in
terest Of the masses. We have
always been an anti-N atiOnal
Bank party. In Jackson's time
we opposed a single National
Bank because it was detrimental
10 the interest Of the American
people. Now that we have two
thousand National Banks, drain
ing the life-blood Of the people,
why should we not raise our vol
ces against them? The old Ma
,ional Bank of Biddle fattened
off the peculiar privileges gran
ed to it by the government,and
our present National Banks are
by which the gov
authorizes a favored
class to pluck the government
goose, except the pin feathers.
which are left for the people,
But who has a right to say that
we are not a hard money party
to-day? What is there i'll our
recent record to controvert that
idea? There is not a Democrat
in the land who will oppose a
resumption of specie payment,
when it can be brought about
without paralyzing industries
and impoverishing and distress