The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1894-01-03
ALETrER TO HAMPTON.
MESSERS. EVANS AND STOKES AN
sWERs THE GENERALS LAST.

SWESS HE GENENSL'S IHO -
Thev e,,sim that Nest cf the Alliance De-
msrds srs Endorsed by Msjorl1s oi
Do,,oc,a.s IN Congress snd ASKS
Fusther Questions.
Hon. Wade Hampton, Washington y.
Neer Sir. Your letter addressed to
ns and publishedin The State and Regis
Ter OF ,he 9th instant has had our care.
tnl attention, and candor compels US 20
say that as a reply to the questions We
propounded it is great disappointment.
1t will prove disappointment to the
great organization of farmers we repre-
sent, whom you attempted to read out
of the Democratic party. 1t WIZ prove
a erieyous disappointment to the great
mass of our people who honestly believe
that the principles underlying The Ocala
nlatsorn are identical with the Democ
recy of Jefferson and the party he iound-
ed: vet, moved BY memories OF past as
sociation and confidence, We're wiling
even 10 hold conviction itself II aoey..
snce until the man they had trusted
in the past might at least give reason
for the bull of accommodation be nao
issued against them.
twill be disappoint tment because
YOU distinctly decline 10 answer the
questions asked-nerfectly plain ques'
tions-that embody every principle IN,
yolyed in the Ocala platform and that
might have been answered 10 nucn iess
space than you have actually USED. II
is disappointment al around and more
than all because your remarks are moi
characterized by your accustomed stralgnt
iorwsrdpess and courtesy.
Remembering thatthe people OF this
State had repeatedly honored you tcr
youe reputed Iberalty and statesman
ike cast of mind, we purposely dis.
carded yerbiage about which more or
less prejudice bad collected and asked
ycr to discuss great principles that lie
behind that verbiage. You decline to
dis cuss principles and talk about plat
forms. Since you have chosen after a
month of dehberatioa TO bring The es-
cussion down from the broad plane OF
craftsmanship upon which our questions
put il and place 1t apparently upon the
low plane OF narrow tsctlonai politics IN
this State, why, perforce We must to some
exten. try to play the politicaian, 100.
l. In the first place, then, you dis.
pose of the first Ocala demand. against
the national banks, thus: No 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, so that there will be some
difficulty in the immediate abolition OF
the national bsnSs." Indeed, and, be-
cause, sorsooth, there Is difficulty IN the
way it is ur6emocratic (that is what you
were to show, 10 agitate it, however
righteous the principle. Is that the posi-
ton, General, to which you would COM
NIT yourself and Us? Wrath are honor
able men of spirit to do with difficulty
>8here 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 (Which The State as
sures Us is studiously courteous} lit
NAV have escaped your memory if you
ever knew the fact" that the Democratic
platform 1856 contains the following
plank: "Congress has no power to
charter a national bank. We believe
srch an institution one of deadly hos.
,Lity to the best interests Of the coun-
try, dangerous to our Republican institu.
tions 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 The people," Moreover,
SIT may have escaped your memory, Il
you ever knew the fact" that this plank
was reaEirned In the platform 1860,
coupled with the declaration taat
Democratic principles are unchange'
able in their nature when applied to the
same subject matters" ''It may have
escaped your memory" too, 2''if you
ever knew the fact" every Democratic
platform ever uttered by the party (save
the lirs.) down to 1864, contalned pre-
ciseiY that same strong language against
national banks. If, then, as the party
has more than once declared its ''prln'
ciples are Interchangeable" it is q little
difficult to frd justification for your
charge Of political heresy against thoss
of Us who in 1898 held to the principle
that from 1840 to 1864 Res- the height
of Democratic virtue
2. You ssy-sse snb. treasury idea is
unconstitutional. Well, really, honorec
sssifeWe thought it rather beneath you
dignity to 60 cracking political chest
nuts like that Your reading must
have been exceedingly limited If Yor
did not know that as prominent Dem
ocratic LAWYER as Judge Norwood o
Georgia and others Of equal proinl
nence had expressed a contrary opln
ion. But suppose We admit that thf
scheme is unconstitutional, does tha
debar us from asltating It? it be
good thing for the masses under th'
changed conditions and progress Of th'
nineteenth century, why should th'
Constitution forever stand between th'
people and it's enjoyment? Are you Sc
rious. General, when you teach b.
Implication that it is undemocratic Il
seek any change in the Constitution
however righteous and desirable tha
change may be? And mark you, it wa
the Democracy of this demand you wer
to discuss.
- 8. You dismiss our demand for tre
coinage of silver with the simple ques
lion: sis this demand in accordanc
with the Democratic platform? And i
this the best that can be done2 Yo1
set out to show that it did not conform
to the Democratic platform. You onl,
ask rs if it does. Assuming that 70,
ask in good faith, We, at least, will no
eyade direct question, so We answe
,,nhesifatinqly. YES. il does: and was S