The Newberry herald and news. (Newberry, S.C.) 1884-1903, 1893-09-06
Clvis Does Up Nr. Gaston's Statements

TO the Editor Of The Herald and News:
1t vour request l Have read the report IN
Tie Herald and News OF the big Alliance
meeting OF Slighs I was also impelled
70 10 this by Mr.. Sligh's promise for the
speakers N opening the meeting that
they Will prove every assertion 'hey
make. They will not 10 as some DO.
make statements they cannot prove or DO
rot prove" In view Of such definite
promise I fully expected to find some
thing new and we'll establised by proof.
But alas. alas I was again doomed TO
disappointment, for I found nothing but
a rclash Of the usual stale and oft refuted
errors and falsehoods, with no attempt
even at proof.
I propose with Your permission again
20 refute Il few Of the principal OF these
errors. we'll aware. however, that 1t IS but
little Use. for our ordinary Alllanceman
seems to prefer falsehOOi, however palpa-
bic. from a number OF his holy order to
truth from any other source. | will no.
tice first some of Mr.. Gaston's statements.
lie says in 1861 Or country was happy
and prosperous" At that time we were
in the throes OF a terrible civil war, hard
II either "happy' or prosperous con-
dition. Error number !. Then he says
We had 4 national banking system at
that time" Now it is a we'll known his
tor;cal fact that OFT old national bank
WAS arbitrarily suppressed by President
Jackson in 1898, and that We had nothing
Of the kind until our present national
banking system went into effect IN the
summer Of 1863. This I state on the au-
thorItv of ex-Secrctarv of Treasury, Hugh
McCulloch. in his Men and Measures Of
Half a Century, page lG1. Mr.: Nc
Culloch was at that time comptroller OF
the currency under Secretary Chase, and
was the chief factor in establishing our
present national banking system. | pre-
sume his authority will not be questioned
by any intelligent man. The meeting
then of national bankers In Washington
in 1861 Of which Mr.. CASTOR speaks could
not have taken place. Error number 2.
Then he proceeds to make number OF
errors as to our circulation at different
dates. He begins with 1866. when as he
alleges the circulation was $50 per capita.
But he does not tell US where he gets his
information-presumably from some i'm
asinative Alliance source, DR.. Macune or
Mr.. DUnning, or perhaps our sage OF
Enoree. I have before me an official
statement of the Secretary Of the Treas
ury Of the circulation for each year from
1860 to the present. It was made up, OF
course, from the treasury books. Sensl-
bic and reasonable men. [ am sire, will
accept it in preference to Mr. Gaston :
utterly unsupported statement. I viii
begin few years further back than Mr..
Castor in 1861, when as he informs us
the country was so happy" and 'prosper-
ons." Our population was then $4,000
Gao; circulation S44S,000,00, per capita
Si3.9S. In 1866, when Mr.. Castor in
forms US we had circulation of so per
capita, the Honorable Secretary reports
a population of 35,0O0000; circulation
of $673,0O0,O00, per capita slS.99. Ii
1870, when Mr.. CASTOR gives us clrcu-
lation of SIS per capita. the Secretary re-
ports population 35,0O0,000, circulation
&G75,0OO.O00, per capita $3.50. In 1850,
when Mr.. Castor given us a circulation
OF SO per capita, the Secretary reports
population 50,000000 circulation S913,-
OOUOCO, per capita Sl9.41. In 1891, Mr..
Castor gives us circulation of only
s44.35 per capita. The Secretary reports
a population of 64,000,0O0, circulation
OF 0,000,000, per capita S23.5, or
nearly five times as much as Mr.. Castor
gives us. The above will Suffice I think,
to show to any intelligent man the value
OF Mr.. Gaston's statements, so T. ed
bother with him no further. I will only
add that the very last official report Of
the Treasury department, to August /,
1898. reports per capita circulation of
S224O2.
Of Mr.. Bowden's address I have but
little to remark. 1t seems to have bee
chiefly relative to the organization of the
Alliance. I may fere say that there are
some things about the Alliance OF which
I highly approve. In SO far as it stands
for the building up of the interests OF the
farmer" and in so far as it is not a fight
against other classes. but only IN the In
terest of our agricultural and laboring
classes. no one endorses it more heartily
than l do. I took an active part in the
organization Of the Farmers Movement
in tbic Stnta bac111cn 7 rerardnQ it q