Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

the JEFFERSONIAN A Weekly Paper Edited by THOS. E. WATSON and J. D. WATSON. Vol. 111. No. 1. Watson Tells Why He Tabors Greenbacks When W. J. Bryan was told Thomas E. Watson, of Georgia, who was the Populist candidate for Vice-President on the Bryan ticket in 1896, would advocate greenback money at a White House luncheon to be held next Monday, he said: “I won’t comment on that until I see it over Mr. Watson’s own signature. That paper may have copied the interview from The World.” The World had printed no such interview, but telegraphed Mr. Watson a request to make his position clear, and also to outline the arguments he will make to the President. Here is the answer wired by the noted Populist: Thomson, Ga., Dec. 2. To the Editor of The World: Your telegram received. I cannot under stand why Mr. Bryan should receive in credulously the statement that I would advise the President to issue greenbacks. Mr. Bryan knows perfectly w y ell that lam and always have been a greenbacker. In other words, I have always contended that the Constitution of the United States vested in the Govern ment the right to create money. In his messages of 1815 and 1816 Presi dent Madison took the same position that I now take. In Gen. Jackson’s famolus fight on the national bank he took the same position which I now take. When President Lincoln issued greenbacks during the war he also took the position that the Government had the right to create national currency out of any material that it saw fit to select. The Su preme Court of the United States, in the cele brated case of Juillard against Grenman, distinctly decided that the Constitution gave to Congress the right to create money and of any material that it saw fit to select. This decision, known as the “ Legal Tender Decision.” was made in 1884, but prior to that time the same principle had been decided by the great New England Judge Story, who delivered the opinion of the majority of the Supreme Court. The case is reported in. “Second Mason, pages 1 to 8.” Former Issues of Greenbacks. The acts of 1862 and 1863, which author ized an issue of $450,000,000 of greenbacks have never been repealed. It is true that in 1866 Congress provided that these greenback notes might be .retired to the extent of $lO, 000,000 per month for six months and then at the rate of $4,000,000 per month. In the exercise of the discretion thus given the Secretary began to destroy the green backs. Before he was stopped by act of Con gress he had burned $44,000,000 of these notes. But there was so much indignation on Atlanta, Ga., Thursday, January 2, 1908. the part of the people against this destruc tion of their money that in February, 1868, Congress suspended the act which gave the Secretary the discretion to destroy the green backs. When the panic of 1873 came on there was a clamor for more money, just as there is now. In response to that popular demand the Gov erment reissued $26,000,000 of the notes which had been cancelled under the discretionary act of 1866. In 1875 Congress, provided again that the greenback notes might be re duced to the sum of $300,000,000. Again the Secretary of the Treasury began to destroy the greenbacks. Once more however, the people cried out against this contraction of the currency, and in 1878 Gen. Grant used his great influence to put a stop to it. By the act of May 31, 1878, the Secretary of the Treasury was required to reissue the green backs as fast as they were redeemed and can celled. In other words, the process of con traction was checked. At the time this w r as done the outstanding amount of the greenbacks was $346,681,000 in round numbers. At this sum they have stood ever since. My contention is that the Government should now do precisely what the Government did under similar circum stances in 1873. I Advice to Mr. Bryan. I am astonished that Mr. Bryan should ex press any surprise when he reads my position is that which squares so absolutely with the historic Democratic position. Let him study Jackson’s farewell address. Let him study the speeches of Thomas 11. Benton. Let him peruse the messages of Mr. Madison. Let him master the financial letters of Thomas Jefferson. Let him grasp the splendid train of reasoning in which John C. Calhoun argues in favor of governmental currency and he will then be better able to recognize what i» genuine Jeffersonian Democracy when he sees it. - * The national banks are given the use of the two hundred and fifty millions of the public funds. This is wrong. They are given bonds for which they do not pay and for whose issue there is no good reason. This is wrong. The present Administration has followed the example of President Cleveland and President McKinley rather than the precedent of 1873. To the astonishment of the radicals Mr. Bryan has not challenged the right of the national bankers to perpetu ate their undemocratic system, but has sug gested a governmental guaranty in their be half which would perpetuate the system which Jefferson, Benton and Jackson so bitterly an tagonized. I profoundly regret to see that Mr. Bryan is disposed to Sidestep the money question. He cannot succeed in doing so. It is the burning question of the hour and cannot be put aside. The single gold standard violates the Constitution* and gives too much power to the few who control the gold. The nation al banking system has brought the country to the verge of ruin and must be fought to the deafL If Mr. Bryan refuses to grapple with the enemies of the public wealth leader ship of the Jeffersonian Democrats will slip out of his hands. THOMAS E. WATSON. —New York World. WATSON AND FINANCE. If the Chancellor Oxenstiern lived in •ur day, he, would brobably change his famous admonition to something like this: “Behold, my son, with how little knowledge history is writ.” Mr. Thomas E. Watson, in a commu nication addressed to the Post, and printed on Wednesday, delivered himself of this specimen of misinformation: “The first issue of treasury noses, under Mr. Lincoln’s adminstration, was $50,000,000, and these greenbacks were ‘full legal tender be tween man and man.’ These notes did not de preciate, but circulated on equality with coin, for the simple reason that every citizen oould do as much with a paper dollar as he could with a coin dollar.” Did Mr. Watson, who pleads guilty to the charge of being a lawyer, ever read the acts creating “the first issue of treasury notes'?” Possibly not, and if he did, he has forgot its terms and its import. The dates of those statutes were July 17 and August 5, 1861. They were not “greenbacks,” and were never so classed in the financial nomenclature of our Government until Mr. Tom Watson thus distinguished them, so far as our poor infor mation advises us. And it is proper to add that they were not made full legal tender until the act of March 17, 1862, was approved. Beides. they were $60,000,000 and not $50,- 000,000. But that is not all. This very issue Mr. Watson extols so flatteringly, was, in express terms of the law creating it,' redeemable in coin on demand of the holder and there was a dollar in coin behind every dollar of them, and that is' what made them as valuable before they got to be full legal tender as they were after the law made them so. They were hoarded just like gold, and by midsummer of 1862 they were as hard to get as gold, while the sure-enough greenback that Mr. Watson confounds them with, grew on 'blackberry briers, to be had for the picking, so to speak. It is manifest that Mr. Watson has never (Continued on Page Thirteen.) Price five Cents.