The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-05-29
MIR. SPRINGER oN TIE BANK TAX

The arguments which Mr. Springer pre-
scented to the House of Representatives on
Saturday last against a repeal Of the
tax on State bank issues are those usual
ly made, and they ought not TO be allowed
to defeat the bill.
Mr.. Springer commenced by saying that
under no circumstances should We re-
turn TO the system Of State-bank circua-
ton which prevailed before the war"
And why should we not? The country
moved along then In the orbit pre-
scribed TO 1t by the Constitution. The
Constitution has remained unchanged,
yet the country is now moving in an
orbit respecting this matter which Chief
Justice Marshall, General Washington,
James Madison, Daniel Webster, John G.
Calhoun. and Henry Clay would have
been shocked and astonished at If any one
had foretold it to them. We were certainly
within the lines of the Constitution then,
whne no man who understands the case
and has the slightest regard for his repu-
tauon will say that we are within the
lines Of the Constitution now. All that he
can say for it is that the necessities of
a breach of the Constitution and that
his ideas of sound policy make him pre4er
to continue the breach rather than TO
return to the true lines. If Mr.. Springer
will put his case in that way there Will
be some honesty in ii, however foolish
it may be.
From another point Of view we ask
again, why should we not return? No
one can deny that in 1861 during period
Of seventy years that we lived within
the lines laid down for the Government
by the Constitution. we thrived and pros
pered as no land ever did. We do not
mean to intimate that we have not pros
pered since, but our recent prosperity
has been Of an order very different from
the old. In the first seventy years OF
our existence as a nation. and with a
population of more than thirty millions,
there was not one man considered rich
then that would be called a very rich man
now. The whole face of the country was
covered over with men who were well
off and rich, according to the ideas Of
riches that then prevailed, but there was
little or no concentration of wealth in a
few hands. And why? Because our
system OF banking allowed every man TO
make full use of his resources. Every
neighborhood had its bank at which each
individual was known. and he could Dor
row the money there that his personal
character and his property entitled him
to- But under the new system banking
Is conhned TO the commercial centres, the
countryman is unknown to bank man
ayers, and banking accommodations are
confined to the thrifty and the favorites
Of the commercial centres. The obvious
consequence is the accumulation of wealth
in the hands of those who receive the
favors while the great body of the peo-
pie are left to scufile along as they best
can. Under the Old system all men had
an equal chance. according TO their prop
erty and credit, and prosperity was diff
system the favored few have all the
chances. and wealth is all directed to-
wards the hands OF these We answer
then, that If We should return TO the
old order Of things we would return to
the way Of equal laws that the wise men
who framed our Government intended,
and we should have wealth scattered
amongst all the people instead OF being
congested in few hands.
We may take Mr.. Springer up again
and examine some other things that he
said.