The Kenosha telegraph. [volume] (Kenosha, Wis.) 1860-1888, 1880-10-29

| tender notes. And this candidate, standing
upon this platform, Gen. Hancock had recently
congratulated upon his supposed election as a
! GLORIOUS result.
| GEN. HANCOCK DOES NOT UNDERSTAND.
| Perhaps Gen. Hancock does not understand
that an issue of 500, 900, 900 more legal ten
/ ders to retire the bonds which become redeem
able next year would be double violation of
repeated pledges of the United States. The
| Government has pledged itself not to issue
| more legal tenders, and to pay its bonds in
| gold. Perhaps he does not understand that
such a new issue, for such purpose, would
| cause the United States notes to fall greatly in
value, SO that public creditors would be forced
| to receive for their bonds far less than the
| value promised. But if he does not, what
safety can there be in trusting the executive
| power to him? 1t seems hard to believe that a
! great party can consider such a measure either
honest or wise, but the same men who
| believed that such a step would be
/ neither dishonest nor fatal in 1868 may, as
| easily, and with as much sincerity believe
! that it would not be dishonest nor fatal now.
/ When the Democratic party, in spite of all Re-
| publican efforts, defeated every plan of refund
| ing last winter, in what other way did it intend
| to deal with the bonds that became redeemable
next year? In Congress, as IN Maine, Demo-
| Gratis who knew that payment of bonds with
! greenbacks would be ruinous and dishonorable,
| for the sake Of party success, joined with Dem
ocrats and Greenback men who propose that
| course. VINO can say that the same men would
not sacrifice conviction to partisan expediency
after the election? Who can say that this alli-
ance would not destroy the public credit, stop
specie payments, and plunge the country into
! incalculable disasters by q new issue of $780,
! 900, 900 in legal-tender notes?
THE TAXATION OF BONDS.
! Who can tell whether bills now pending,
which provide for taxation of United States
bonds, would be passed if the Democratic party
would gain the power? True that party
| pledges q I" strict maintenance of the public
faith" but did it mean to violate the public
! faith in 1863? Its national platform then pro-
! posed equal taxation of every species of
| property according to its real value, including
| Government bonds" If the Democratic party
did not then think this an act of bad faith
and we must assume that it did t.
| there Is no greater reason to think it an act of
/ bad faith now. Gen. Hancock gave his
unreseryed approval to the declarations of
! 1868. One year later, in Ohio, his party pro-
posed III its platform ''to pay no interest on
United States bonds until they are taxed" ard
declared that "if the claim for payment III
| gold should be persisted in, it would force upon
the people the question of Reputation" Sim
liar purposes were ayowed by that party i'll
1870, in OHIO and Indiana, and they have never
been retracted. If Gen Hancock now thinks
| that taxation of bonds would not be a strict
maintenance of public faith" ne has changed
his mind since 1868, and Of that change he has
! given no evidence.
DO WE WANT INFLATIoNH
Who can tell how soon, if the Democratic
party should succeed, the Resumption act
would be repealed and the paper currency in
Hated? Solemn pledges of public faith stand
| in the way. But the Democratic party has at
| VII I Lodi
it is not more likely to regard t.. M now than it
| was one year ago. In February 1879, when
specie payments had continued nearly two
months, LOG Democrats in the House voted for
repeal of the Resumption act, and only q
against it. The spirit of the party was even
more decided than in November, 1877, eleven
months before resumption, when 104 Democrats
voted for the repeal of the act and %
against it. In the fall elections OF
1873 the Democratic party throughout tie
| West and South and in Pennsylvania
| denounced resumption as q great wrong
and an utter impossibility, less than three
months before specie payments began. In
1879, wherever elections were held in those
States, that party insisted that resumption
must fail and would work terrible injustice.
Only one year ago it supported for Governor,
with the largest vote ever given to any Demo-
cratic candidate at State election in Ohio, the
most jealous and extreme advocate OF imitation
in that State. 1t is now supporting for Gov
ernor themost extreme intiationist in It's ranks in
| Indiana. i hese and other leaders of like char
acter have made no pretense of a change of
purpose. Nor is it possible that great party
composed of millions of voters, has suddenly
| changed honest beliefs and fixed principles, TO
which it has adhered through years OF contr0-
versy. 1t is true that the Democratic party
! promises "honest money!" but that party will
hardly say that it desired dishonest money dur
al
ton and demanded imitation. 1t must be in
ferred that the phrase "honest money" does
not mean to Democrats what it means to Re-
| pubicans Nearly four-fifths of the Demo-
cratic party, according to its representation in
Congress, earnestly oppose resumption, even
since specie payments began, becauSe it has been
trained to believe that resumption is mischiey-
Gus, and honestly desires initiation, because it
has been taught that more money is needed
"to emancipate the people from the tyranny Of
money kings" These notions have not been
eradcated by sudden change in the tactics of
few party managers. Who can feel assured
that they will not shape legislation as soon as
the Democratic party has control?
THE BEST BANKING SYSTEM
Who can tell how soon the best banking sys-
tenn the country has yet seen would be destroyed
if the Democratic party should succeed? There
is scarcely any other purpose In which that par
|
to get rid of the national banks. The very
name "natonal' is offensive to those who cling
to State-right traditions. The supposed infu-
ence of national banks is thought to be used
with great effect against the Democratic party.
The ancient antagonism of the party to a ma
tional bank. and the chronic antlpathy of the
rural population to the money lenders have
been continually infiamed by artful appeals.
The South has given to the system SO little IA
vor that less than per cent. of the national
| banks, and little more than 5 per cent. of their
deposits, are to be found in that section
In nearly every Western State, and even
IN Maine and Vermont, the Democratic
party has formally demanded abolition
of the misunderstanding system. AS early as
January, 1870, resolution instructing COM
mittee to report bill to withdraw all national
bank circulation, and to issue greenbacks in its
stead, received fifty-three Democratic votes in
the House, with only one Democratic vote
against it. From that day to this there has
been no evidence that the purpose of the party
in this respect has changed, and bills to carry
that purpose into effect are now pending, with
very strong support. If the Democratic party
should ever secure the Executive a most siren
nous effort to break up the misunderstanding
system would undoubtedly be made. Local in
fuences would powerfully aid the movement
Democratic politicians in Southern and West
ern States are eager to get into their own hands
and note-issuing corporations.
COUNTLESS EVILS OF THE OLD SYSTEM.
The commercial world knows full we'll what
countless evils were caused by the old system
of irresponsible and heterogeneous State banks.
1t is we'll aware that the safety, uniformity, and
peculiar local elasticity of our present banking
system have contributed most powerfully to the
commerce and the development. of resources.
Conservative men would, therefore, regard an
overturning of the system with great apprehen-
sion, if the transition to any other could be
effected without immediate shock or disturbance,
or harm to the public credit But it is not pos
sible to effect the change without shock.
Bonds amounting to S400, 000,0 900. now held by
the banks, could not be paid and retired without
imitation, dishonor and disaster. They could
not be thrown upon the market without
great prostration of the public credit. Yet
the banks, if deprived of the advantages
of circulation, could not afford to keep
their capital locked up in bonds. Under Dem
ocratic administration, too, with a profound
uncertainty as to the speedy taxation of bonds,
or their payment in deprecated notes, it would
be extremely difficult to find new purchasers
for bonds. In the change of system great
contraction of loans would be inevitable. Many
banks would wind up their affairs and go out of
existence. Many others would be forced to cut
down their loans in order to make the
change without ruinous delay. 1t seems almost
incredible that any one should propose to throw
INTO disorder loans amounting to 1895, 900, 900,