The morning news. [volume] (Savannah, Ga.) 1887-1900, 1890-09-29
The Test of Loyalty.

In his speech at Helena on Thursday Gov
I Gordon said that the alliance sub-treasIry
bill should not be made a test Of loyalty to
I the interests of the farmers or alliance prin-
ciples for the reason that nowhere except in
/ Georgia is that bill demanded by the farm
ers with anything like unsnimity. Indeed,
| in the great west little or nothing seems TO
be known Of IL, and in the north it is not
discussed at ALL In few of the southern
states it is pushed to the front as an issuo,
but only in Georgia is the attempt made 60
make 1t the test of loyalty to alliance prin-
cples.
1t is extremity doubtful IL many Of thoss
who profess to favor the sub-treasury bill
understand 1t fully They kaow thas it is
bill 20 increase the currency aud thereby
afford relief II farmers at the time they are
moving their crops, but they have not
studied it sufficiently TO have an opinion Of
their own as TO whether it is practicable or
not, or whether 1t would be helpful or harm
full 20 the farmers.
The leading men in the Democratic party
men like Mr. Carlisle and Mr.. Turner,
who have had a great deal of experience
with financial measures Of ono kind aud
another in their long public careers
have studied the sub-treasury bill thor
oughly, and have decided against it. They
are not hostile to the farmers. On the con-
trary, they are extremely friendly to them,
and are anxious TO assist them by every
means in their power. They are against
the bill because they are satisfied that while
1t might work well at first, it would ulti-
mately bring ruin upon those it Is in
tended 10 benefit.
Who in this state stand up squarely for
the sub-treasury biua Does Mr.. No-thsni
We do not wish 20 place him in a wrong
position. but our impression is that he
favors it. or something bettsr" Does Mr..
Norwood say that it is practicable, dssir-
able and constitutional9 We do not remem-
Der that he does. He wants relief fo- tho
farmers, but does he want the sub treasury
bill?
A few days ago the Southern Alliance
Farmer sent out as O supplement paper
on the sub-treasury bill which is under
stood to have been written by Mr.. Pat Cal
houn- Having the Endorsement of the alli-
ance organ, it would be reasonable to sup
pose that it was defense Of that bill, but is
ltf Is 1t not rather an argument in favor
OF an increase in the volume and fiexibility
OF the currencya That Mr.. Calhoun is not
welded to the sub-treasury bill, and has
doubts about its practicability, is shown by
the following extract from bis paper:
Now, If IL can be demonstrated by discus
sion that all this can be done through q cur
rency Issued on the great staple crops with
out carrying the government into other the
warehouse or banking business, ON satis-
fed the farmers would promptly accept
such modification of their views. aud
every productive interest in the whole
country could be brought into accord and
harmony on the subject.
1t seems, therefore. that about everybody.
except few alliance leaders in this STATE, is
in favor of something better" than the
suh-treasury bill This means, of course.
that they do not unqualihedly accept
that bill II, therefore, there is no
probability Of the subtrsasury bill ever be-
coming law. and il those supposed to be
in favor of that bill do not favor it.
although sincerely DESTROYS that there shall
be some financial legislation that will help
the farmers, why should that bill be made
the test of loyalty to the interests of the
farmers or to alliance principless