The Stark County Democrat. [volume] (Canton, Ohio) 1833-1912, 1878-09-05

mits) provided for the destruction OF
one. fourth. And they will keep on the
ennobling process If they again get full
power, until all are destroyed, as was
their intention when they passed the
resumption law. Now, when the law
was passed stopping this destruction OF
greenbaCks, over which Mckinley is 30
iubilant, $3.50 100000 of greenbaeks were
already "ennobled" TO destruction; and
from McKinley's eCstaCy over this law,
we infer that he, too, regards the de-
struction of those $36,000,0O0 of green
backs as a great calamity. Now will he
explain why, in their touching love for
the greenbaCk, he and his party made
no effort to restore those $36, 100000, for
whose destruction his party is alone re-
sponsible. n,.
Mckinley farther says, "it is charged
that resumption means the destruction
of the greenbaCk." 1t may not mean 30
now, since the Democrats passed the
law which "it was left to Republican to
propose" forbidding the Secretary to re,
tire the greenbacks, but we assert that
the RESUMPTION law did provide the zen.
noblinp" process for the destruction Of
all the greenbacks. This Mckinley very
well knows as lawyer; but he denies it,
and in support of his denial, plays as his
trump card an extract from Secretary
Sherman's report to Congress, Dec. Sd,
1877. But here we meet him, and 60
him one better, with card from Sher'
mans predecessor, which we shall cite
before closing, The quotation from Sher-
man, cited by Mckinley, is as follows
existing laws do not clearly define
whether United States notes, when re-
deemed after Jan. lst, 1870, may be re-
issued. The Secretary Is of the opinion
that notes, when redeemed after Jan, LIST
if the amount outstanding is not in eX-
cess of three hundred millions, may be
reissued as The erigencie8 Of hepubtc SER
Uice mag require"
We call the attention of the reader to
the words in italics, Thisquotation will
not avail this inCipient statesman. 1t
proves too much entirely. Secretary
Sherman admits that the resumption
law did not compel him 10 reissue the re.
deemed greenback8; and that he had the
power to retire them, unless the exi-
gencies of the public service" require
their reissue. In this extract Secretary
Sherman admits that the Secretary had
the power to retire greenbacks, and that
in "exigencies" he mdy-10t must, reissue
them. Now where does he get that au-
thority to retire greenbacksP By the re-
sumption act clearly, for there was not
at the passage of the resumption act, nor
has there at any time since been any
other law authorizing the retirement OF
a single dollar of greenbacks. We chal'
lenge Mckinley to name such law.
Now of these "exigenCies" the Secretary
is alone the Judge, and we all know what
that means, with full power on his part
or any other secretary, to sell bonds with
out limit for coin resumption, and the
power on the part of the National Bank
to issue bank notes without limit to re-
place greenbacks. What if no such tex
igencies" occur or when they have ceas'
ed? Even under this construction, put
forth by denagogues Of the resumption
law, the process of the Secretary on Jan.
1st 1879, would be simply to sell bonds
for coin, and with it pay or redeem the
greenbaCks as fast as presented, and
stow them away in the Treasury and
then wait for an exigenCy, which would
never Occur-in his opinion, or that of
any other apostle of the money power
And if such an exigency occurred, the
Secretary would Coolly answer, what Re-
publicans, including Mckinley, are now
proclaiming, that it would be q fiat ViOLa-
ton of The Constitution to issue legal tenders |
ercept in 2Uar. A greenbaCk once paid or
redeemed by the government with gold |
has fulfilled it's mission and is dead. 1t
is nothing bat piece of waste paper,
without any validity as a legal tender,
and the government could not constitu- |
tionally Clothe it with legal tender power
and again issue it as such unless the goO'
ernment possessed, under the Constitution
unlimited power to issue legal tenders at all
times.
So, we say it avails Mckinley nothing
to quote Sherman-the quotation proves
too much and refltes the statement of
Mckinley at Massillon, that the resump.
ton act provided only for the retirement
or destruction of the greenbacks in ex-
cess of $900,0O0,0OO. Besides, Secretary
Sherman, whilst claiming the power un.
der the resumption act to retire green.
backs, did not pretend in that report
that the resumption act conferred upon
him the power to reissue greenbacks
when redeemed; and no one knows it
better than Mckinley Here we have
another specimen Of McKinley's charla-
tanism. He had not even the honesty
oprraotlyT n 70 lyao
two isolated sentences, joins them to-
gether las appears above) into one para
graph, omitting all between them, the
very part which shows up his fraudulent
pretencea. 1t is humiliating indeed to
expose the trusted servant of the
people thus, to tear off the mask under
which he is masquerading, and to show
him in his true character as an unmiti-
gated demagogue. But he deserves it,
and moreover, justice to the people re.
quire it. In the part omitted by MCKin-
ley, for the purpose of deceiving the
people, Sherman states that the power
to reissue the greenbaCk when redeem
ed) in an "exigency," is derived from
section 1879 of the revised statutes. Now
Mckinley knew full we'll that this is all
bosh, and therefore concealed it. That
section provides that "when any United
States notes are returned to the treasury,
they may be reissued from time to time,
as the exigencies of the public interest
may require" This section is but part
of the revision of former laws, the words
occur verbatim in the act of March 3, '63,
(vol. IL, p. I'll, US. statutes) providing
for the issue of legal tenders. This act
provides that greenbaCks shall be re-
ceivable by the government for bonds,
and in payment of all taxes and dues ex-
cept imports, and then uses the words
quoted. The word returned" clearly
and plainly refers to the receipt by the
treasury, of greenbacks for bonds, taxes
and dues, and has no application what
ever to the payment or redemption of
greenbacks with coin. But, besides this,
this section was passed six months be-
fore the RESUMPTION law, and even Nc |