New Orleans Republican. [volume] (New Orleans, La) 1867-1878, 1875-07-29
80
THE DIFFERENCE PLAIN.

| THE DIFFERENCE PLAIN.
The New Orleans Times inquiries VII!
il is that the Republican and Democratic
press which condemns 1.-The irretfee1nablt
paper money and lots-of-it platform
do not throw stone OF two at Mr
Morton. The New Orleans Abeille, from ;
French point Of view, accepts the ex
PLANTATION Of the same platform as proving
by the assertions of Mr. Pendleton him
self, that ''the Democrats OF Ohio do no
really differ upon Fundamental principles
With their co-religionnaires Of the rest
the Union We can readily explain why
theirs is direliction and abandonment
Of principle in the Democratic indorse
ment OF imitation and dilution. while
there would be no such departure from
principle on the part OF the Republican
party in doing the same thing.
When the Democratic party called
commenced its war on the currency Of the
country. caused its revenue deposits tc
be removed and confided to treasury de-
positories, it placed their action Oh the
high and solid ground Of principle. II
was argued that labor was the chief elc-
ment Of production. and that it was emit
tied to the equivalent Of wages i'll me-
dunn which was Of equal and universal
value. Standing for the people at that
day, Democracy array ed itself against any
other currency except specie or its instant
equivalent. So says the history Of the
J period Thus argued Benton, and Brown
Of Mississippi. and Hammond OF South
Carolina, and Hunter OF Virginia. There
is . great deal in the argument. The
people are the sourc. hot only Of oil
power, but Of all production. They
should be guarded from all that may i'm
pair Ihs value Of theis toll, and protected
from all those devices Of wealth for nom
producers from the indirect reduction Of
labor values. The Democrats contended
that any delegation Of the national credit
to banking corporation was unconstitu-
tional. They thus suppressed national
bank, and took open and avowed ground
against the banking and even the credit
system.
The Wings CT the same period took the
opposite ground and maintained that
credit system based upon the material
ability of the country to make good its
obligations, WAS sound and sagacious
system, and pointed TO the examples OF all
modern nations, especially to Holland and
England, to prove their positions. The
Wings did not chose to stand in the atti-
tude of robbing the people by banking de-
vices They claimed that q credit system
did more for the industrious and enter
prising than hard money system could
do. They retorted on the Democracy
that to deny credit to honest and intel
ligent enterprise and limit the national
progress to the hard money in circulation
would be to reduce labor to it's lowest rate
and give to capital an undue influence.
The Wings cited the growth and pros
perity of the Union, the accumulation Of
wealth by individuals whose sole capital
was their credit. and affirmed that Ameri-
can freedom was won and American pro-
gress established upon the credit OF money
borrowed abroad.
The hard money men were then the
aristocrats, wishing to continue the
feudal system Of unrequited labor, while
the Wings were the true friends Of the
people, in giving them the credit created
by their common labor, as q means of |
promoting individual enterprise.
1t is to be supposed that the people |
deemed the balance of argument was
against the Democracy, because We now
have currency based on national credit, |
while the credit system in all branches of !
trade has no other Limitation than the |
Of individual OF collective |
confidence. That the Wings had the best
Of the argument is shown conclusively by
the fact that the, Democracy has aban-
aoned its own opposit ion 10 national
to the payment Of all national
dues on coin and TO . credit system under
no other restraint than its own abuses.
It is not when Democracy have ae-
copied every doctrine that The Wings ever
;aught, and submitted to every principle |
hat the Republicans have ever enforced,
hat Democracy should claim to be a
party Of national principle, or that the
Wings should be told their faith is effete.
As the Democratic party, then, claims .
rational unity on principle, and as specie,
Y its current equivalent, was principle
proclaimed in its fundamental creed, we
rave right 20 stigmatize the Ohio plat
orm IS violation Of principle.
As the Republican party has never made
he mode of currency a political principle,
tut mere measure Of policy, there is no
UGH dereliction Of principle in any meas
Ire Of value which it nay deem expedient.
rr. Allen holds the Republican party re-
ponsible for the degree Of depreciation
o which the national currency descended
Turing the civil war. Yet this did not
quail that which the same currency had
cached under the Confederacy, under the
control of the hard money and ,
etter currency Democrats In fact, the
epreciation OF all war currency, from
776 20 the present, has been but pre-. ,
hum which people are willing TO pay