The Abbeville press and banner. [volume] (Abbeville, S.C.) 1869-1924, 1894-01-24
A LETTER TO HAMPTON.
MESSERS. EVANS AND STOKES AN
sWERs THE GENERALS LAST.

mands sre Endorsed by 8 Majority OF
the Democrats in Congress and Asks
Farther Question:.
Hon. Wade Hampton, Washingt DC, D.
&.
Dear Sil: Your letter addressed to
rs and publishedin The State and Regis
ter OF The 9th instant has had our care
tul attention. and candor compels US 20
say that as a replT to the questions we
propounded it is great disappointment.
1t will prove disappointment to the
great organization of farmers we repro
sent, whom you attempted to read out
of the Democratic party. 1t will prove
a erlevous disappointment to the great
mass of our people who honestly believe
that the principles underlying the Ocala
platform are Identical with the Democ
racy of Jefferson and the party be fouod'
ed; vet, moved by memories of past as
sociation and confidence, were willing
even TO hold conviction itself in abey.
ance until the man they had trusted
in tho past might at least give reason
for the bull OF accommodation he had
issued against them.
1t will be a disappointment because
you distinctly decline 10 answer the
questions asked-perfectly PLAIN ques'
nons-that embody every principle IN.
volved in the ocals platform and that
might have been answered in much less
space than YOU have actually used. 1t
Is disappointment all around and more
than all because your remarks are not
characterized by your accustomed straight
torwardness and courtesy.
Remembering that the people of this
State had repeatedly honored you tor
your reputed liberality and statesman'
like cast Of mind, We purposely dis
carded verbiage about which more or
less prejudice had collected and asked
you to discuss great principles that lie
behind that verbiage. You decline to
discuss principles and talk about plat
forms. Since you have chosen after a
month of deliberation to bring the DIS.
cussion down from the broad plane OF
craftsmanship upon which our questions
put il and place it apparently upon the
low plano Of narrow factlonal politics in
this State, why, perforce we must to some
extent try to play the Politician, too.
l. In tho first place, then, you dis.
pose of the frat Ocala demand. against
tho national banks, thus: mo such
demand Is made by the Democratic par.
ty. It may have escaped your memory,
if you ever knew the fact, that these
banks hold charters which do not expire
until 1907, 80 that there will be some
difficulty in the immediate abolition OF
the national banks" Indeed, and, be.
cause, forsooth, there ls difficulty in the
way it is undemocratic (tbat is what you
were to show, to agitate 1t, however
righteous the principle. Is that the posi-
tion, General, to which you would COM
NIT yourself and us? Wrath are honor
able men of spirit to do with difficulty
where principle is involved? But are
you sure, General, that no such demand
Is made by the Democratic party?
To borrow your own choice phrase
ology toward us (whlcn The State as
sures US Is studiously courteous) ut
NAV have escaped your memory if you
ever knew the TACT" that the Democratic
platform 1856 contains the following
plank: congress has no power to
charter a national bank. We believe
such an institution one of deadly hos.
tilisy to the best interests Of the coun-
try, dangerous to our Republican instltu.
lions and the liberties of the people, and
calculated TO place the business OF the
country within the CONTROL of concen
trated money power and above the laws
and the will of lhe people," Moreover,
''it may have escaped your memory, II
you ever knew the fact" that this plank
was rea62r ned in the platform 1860,
coupled with the declaration that
democratic principles are unchange-
able In their nature when applied to the
same subject matters" "It may have
escaped your memory" too, ''if you
ever knew the iact," every Democratic
platform ever uttered by the party (saVe
tho Ilrs.) down to 1864, contained pre-
ciselY that same strong language against
national banks. If, then, as the party
has more than once declared it's "prln'
ciples are unchangeable," it is a little
difficult to find justification for your
charge of political heresy against those
of us who In 1893 held to the principle
that from 1910 to 1864 was the height
of Democratic virtue.
2. You say the sub. treasury idea is
unconstitutional. Well, really. honored
sir, We thought it rather beneath your
dignity to 20 cracking political chest
nuts like that. Your reading must
have been exceedingly limited If you
did not know that as prominent Dem
oeratic LAWYER as Judge Norwood o.
Georgia and others Of equal proini'
nence had expressed a contrary opln'
ion. But suppose we admit that the
scheme is unconstitutional, does thai
debar us from agltating it? Ifit be
good thing for the masses under the
changed conditions and progress OF the
nineteenth century, why should the
Constitution forever stand between the
people apd its enjoyment? Are you Sc
rious. General, when you teach by
implication that it is undemocratic te
seek any change in the Constitution
however righteous. and desirable thai
change may bep And mark you, it Wa
the Democracy of this demand you were
to discuss.
8. You dismiss our demand for fret
coinage of silver with the simple ques
ton: IT'S this demand in accordance
with the Democratic PLATFORM And Ii
this the best that can be done? Yor
set out to show that it did not conform
to the Democratic platform. You only
ask us if 1t does. Assuming that Yor
ask in coed faith, we, at least, will no
axrada o d,rect nnastinn 40 wa ansWe]