The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1891-10-22
THAT GREENWOOD SPEECH.

THAT GREENWOOD SPEECH.
We publish elsewhere, with pleasure,
the explanation of the Cotton Plant of
DR.. Stokes Greenwood speech, head
line and all, just as it appeared in the
last issue of the Cotton Plant. We re-
gret that We did not see the explana-
ton as published in the Cotton Plant
Of August -, but about that time the
editor was absent, and if we ever saw it
we do not recall it.
The explanation, as we see 1t, leaves
the argument Just as we reported IL, so
for as its merits go. We give below
what we reported DR.. Stokes as saying
at Greenwood. It is taken from our
issue of July Is. We ask the reader
to compare it with what the Cotton
Plant says he said and see if the two
are not the same:
':The objection urged that this scheme
may cause loss to the government II
there is a decline in price was con-
sidered. President Stokes said there
was no possibility of loss under any
circumstances. This plan would ellml-
nate the speculator and reduce it to the
law of supply and demand.
"SuppOse farmer deposits in the
warehouse 500 worth of cotton and
draws $50 and at the end of the year
when pay day comes this cotton is
only worth $40, and the farmer fails 10
redeem his cotton. You say at once
the government has lost $40. 1t has
done no such thing. What is to hinder
the government from buying that cot
ton in and holding it until the price
advances, and that is what 1t VIII 20.
But suppose the government wants 10
sell out and only realizes $40. Inc
government has lost nothing IN that
case, because the other $40 was IN cir
culation and it stands upon the same
basis as your silver certificate issued
since last July"
Then we asked DR.. Stokes how about
the other $40 that the farmer could
have received for the cottaG when he
deposited it in the warehouse and
drew $50.
If DR.. Stokes will examine the files
of the Cotton Plant he will find, IN an
issue after the publication of our report
Of his Greenwood speech, that it stated
that our report was a fair and correct
report, but that we charged him with
making an argument that he did not
believe himself. We did not intend to
make any charges against him in our
report, but We did not see how be
could make it out that the government
would lose nothing if it received only
$40 for $50 advanced on cotton. Now be
says it is on a par with greenbacks.
Well, now, will the Cotton Plant tell
US how this 100000 Of greenbacks
got in circulation? Did it get in circu-
!ation in the same way as the $40 in
the illustration used by DR.. Stokes?
Are not the treasury notes issued by
the government redeemable in coin?
We do not mean the gold and silver
certificates. Is not the government re-
quired to keep one hundred million
dollars in gold to redeem these 346, ,00o,-
900 # greenbacks?
These 346, 100000 of greenbacks are
simply the notes of the government,
issued in payment of its debts incurred
by the war, which pass as legal tender,
and pass as money instead Of taxing
the people to raise the money and were
given to The people that the govern
ment owed and in payment Of its ex-
penses. True, the $50 would be a note
of the government, but what business
sense would there be in giving a note
for $50 for which the government only
received $40. II would not be long
before such notes would be useless.
TO say that the outstanding $40 was
no loss to the government because 1t
was on the same basis as greenbacks is
no argument. To carry out the same
line of argument, there would be just
as much reason to say that the govern
ment could give to every man who had
Sl00 worth Of cotton $50 and let him
keep his cotton too, because it would
have as good basis behind it as the
greenbacks, and then the man who
had the 500 worth of cotton would not
lose the other $50 that he might have
received for his cotton, in the case sup
posed, when he placed it in the ware
house. Then. too, there would be $50
in circulation instead of $40.
But then we admit that We do
not und and this great scheme of
fnanc I'd have been induced to say
this much id justification of what has
been formerly said. We have only
beer seeking light all the time.