The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1896-07-22

Of the United States. Ny friends, we
have not criticised. We have simply
called attention TO what you know. If
you want criticisms read the dissent
ing opinion Of the court. That will
give you criticisms.
They say we passed sn uncoastltn-
tional law. deny it. The income
tax was not unconstitutional when II
was passed. 1t was not unconsLi.u
tional when it went before the Su,
preme Court for the first time. Ii dla
not become unconstitutional unt! one
Judge changed his ulnd, and we can,
not be expected to know when Judge
will change his mind.
INCoMs: TAN Just
"The income taxi IS 4 Jast law. II
simply intends to put the burdens OF
government Justly upon the backs OF
the people. am in favor OF an IN
come tax. When l find man who
is not willing to pay his share OF the
government which protects him | lind
q man who is unworthy to en- Joy the
blessings Of 4 government like ours.
He says that we are opposing the
national bank currency. 1t is true. II
YOU will read what Thomas Benton
said you will find that he said that Ia
searching history he could find but
one parallel to Andrew Jackson. That
was Cicero. who destroyed the con-
spiracy of Catiline to save Rome. He
did for Rome what Jackson did when
he destroyed the bank conspiracy and
saved America.
1--WE say IN our platform that we
believe the right 10 coin money and
issue money is a function OF govern
menx. We believe it is a part OF SOY,
ereignty and can no more with safety
be delegated TO private individuals
than we could afford TO delegate to
private individuals the power to make
penal statutes or levy laws for taxa,
ton.
Mr.. Jefferson, who was once re
garded as good Democratic authority,
seems to have different opinion FROM
the gentleman who has addressed as
on the part of the minority.
Those who are opposed to this pro
position tell us that the issue of paper
money IS function Of the bank, and
that the government ought to go out
of the banking business. stand with
Jefferson rather than with them 10
holding, as he did, that the issue OF
money is q function of the govern
ment, and that the banks ought to go
out OF the government business.
They complain about that plank
which declares against the life tenure
in office. They have tried to strain il
to mean that which it does not mean.
What we oppose in that plank is the
life tenure that is being built at Wash,
ington, which excludes from partlcl,
patton in the benefits the humber
members of our society. | cannot
dwell on this longer il my limited
time
Let me call attention to two Or
three great things. The gentleman
from New York says that he will pro
pose an amendment providing that
this change in our law shall not affect
contracts already made. Let me re
mind him that there is no intention OF
affecting those contracts which, &C
cording to the present laws, are made
payable in gold. But if he means to
say that we cannot change our none
tary system without protecting those
who have loaned money before the
change was made, / want to ask him
where, in law Or in morals, he can hnd
authority for not protecting the debt
ors when the Act Of 1878 was passed,
when he now insists that we must
protect the creditor.
"He says he also wants to amend
this law and provide that if we fail tc
maintain parity within a year we
will then suspend the coinage Of sl'
yer. We reply that when we advo
cate a thing which we believe will be
successful, we are not compelled to
raise a doubt as to our own sincerity
by trying to show what we will do II
we can.
QUESTION OF PARITY.
81 ask him, j: he will apply his log
ic to US. why be aces not apply it &c
himself. lie says tnat he wants this
country to try tc Secure an lnterna'
tional agreement. Why doesn't he
tel us what he is going to do if they
iail to secure an International agree
mentg There is more reason for him
to do that than for us to fail to main
tain the parity. They have tried for
thirty years-for thirty years-to Sc
cure an International agreement, and
those who are waiting for it most pa,
tiently don't want 1t at all.
Now, my friends, let me come to
the great paramount issue. If they
ask us here why it is that we say more
on the money question than we say
upon the tariff question, l reply that
if protection has slain its thousands,
the gold standard has slain its tens OF
thousands. l; they ask Us why we
did not embody 81? these things in our
platform which we believe, we reply
to them that when we have restored
the money of the constitution, all
other necessary reforms will be posi-
BILE. and that until that is done there
is no reform that can be accomplished
CHANGED IN THREE MONTHS.
"Why is that within three months
such change has come over the sen
timents of this country Three months
ago. when it was confidently asserted
that those who believe in the gold
standard would frame our platform
and nominate another candidate, even
the advocates of the gold standard did
not think that we could elect Presi
dent, but they had good reasons fol
the suspicion, because there is scarcely
a State heee today asking the gold
s:sandard that is not within the abso
lutte control of the Republican party
But note the change. Mr.. Mckin
lev was nominated al st. Louis on
platform that declared for the main
tenance of the gold standard until i
should be changed into bimetallism by
an international agree eement. Mr.. Nc
Kinley was the most popular mar