The Rutland daily globe. [volume] (Rutland, Vt.) 1873-1877, 1875-08-12
GOV MORTON AND OHIO 1NFLATIoNIsTs.


Although Oliver p. Morton, now United
States SENATOR made an excellent ''war
governor" we never have been in the habit
of regarding him as safe political coun-
sellor or first class statesman, nor have
we placed any particular confidence in bis
financial ability, yet we must confess that
he made a capital point against the lag
money democracy of Ohio, in his recent
speech at Urbana. 1t is said that the gov
ernor was always "hard money man at
" heart" but his senatorial record does not
tend to show it, and we find no evidence
of it in the speech referred to. AS an
"outrage" believer, and perhaps in every
other way, we give him the credit of consis-
tency, and, 80 now, we give him the same
credit in reference to financial matters. So
long as the currency question was an
"open question" as he might term it. in
the republican party, as represented Ia
congress, he advocated, and we believe, in
one instance at least, introduced, what we
are wont to call initiation measures. We
do not see that he now processes to confess
his errors or admit his mistakes, but he ac-
-..., r-,-~s. ,.iN Is.o. s~s1iOu
of congress, providing for the resumption
of specie payments, July 4, 1879, as a
flnality so far as the republican party is
concerned, and believes that it should be
80 accepted by the country at large If he
will "stick" to this, we shall have no rea-
son 10 find fault with his future course on
this question, however much we may take
occasion to do so on other matters.
In reference to the course of the Ohio
democracy and their rag money platform,
he makes the point-and, as it seems to us,
the point is well taken--that the party is in
consistent with itself, is dishonest in its
professions, is attempting to delude the
people, and with their record and sent-
ments, the further issue of "greenbacks" as
proposed by them will have the effect OF
flooding the country with a.currency which
they are bound to and will repudiate at the
first opportunity. This follows, as a mat
ter of course, from their past record and
their present professions and the oppor-
tunity for reputation will come when,
after first having obtained sufficient power
to initiate the currency by an additional is
sue of "greenbacks," they shall, also, have
obtained control of the supreme court OF
the United States. The first issue of trea-
sury notes, commonly called "greenbacks,
which provided that they should be "lawful
money, and legal tender in payment OF
all debts public and private in the Unit
ed States" except ETC., was passed Feb
ruary Is, 1862, and we find recorded
against the passage the name of every
democratic senator and all, save two, OF
the democratic representatives. Had the
question of the issue of ''legal tender
notes, in the first instance, been left to q
democratic congress, it is safe to say, We
should never have any such currency.
Whether their opposition TO the issue OF
"legal tenders" had its origin in capt.
ious opposition to the prosecution of the
war, it is needless now to inquire, as their
opposition was placed on altogether differ.
ent grounds. They placed themselves or
the substantial ground that congress was
authorized by the constitution to emit only
one kind of money, and that was specie
They argued, and with great force, thai
gold and silver was the only constitutions
legal tender, that the issue of treasury notei
as legal tender currency would be abso
lutely unconstitutional, and ia this view
they were sustained by no less republican
statesman and jurist than Jacob Collamer
Considering the whole record of the party
from the days of Jackson and Benton dowr
to the present time, 1t is impossible to re
sist the conclusion that they were honest
in this argument. Senator Morton comes
down later and to the time when the su
preme court of the United States, by a ma
jority of one, declared the legal tender acI
unconstitutional, and when the same court
after, as was alleged, it had been en-.
larged and packed for that purpose-by a
similar majority, declared it to be constitu-
tional and valid, and points to the utter
ances of democratic orators and statesmen
to the effect that, notwithstanding the
courts last decision, the law ioas unconsti-
tutional and the Issue of legal tender notes
Hereunder invalid, and denouncing the
court for its last decision and the president
for so constituting the court that it might
be obtained.
Were the democracy honest then? We
believe 80 and if they were SO, can they
be honest now2 Has anything occurred