Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

THE JEFFERSONI .re Vol. 111. No. 2. < Jj v i a / y\ i iT7T — _ m- \ GET OUT! TOM WATSON WRITES AGAIN Thomas E. Watson, of Georgia, has written this letter to The Post: “I have been so very much crowded with work that I look into the statements made by you in reply to my card on the green backs until now. “You fell into error when you said that the amount of Treasury notes first issued was $60,000,000, instead of $50,000,000, as I had stated. Examine the acts and you will find that I was right. The act of July 17, 18.61, limited the issue of notes to $50,000,000. These were issued in August, 1861. “By the act of February 12, 1862, an ad ditional $10,000,000 of the notes were author ized, thus bringing the total to $60,000,000. “By the act of February 25, 1862, the $150,- 000,000 of Treasury notes, to be issued under that act, were made I lawful money.’ The only exception was in the payment of interest on the public debt and customs duties. By this act, also, the $50,000,000 of notes first is sued and which, as you say, were generally called demand notes, were to be absorbed by an equal amount of the new notes, which, as you say, were generally called 1 greenbacks.’ “This left outstanding the second issue of demand notes—slo,ooo,ooo—and these rose with coin, while the greenbacks depreciated. A Weekly Paper Edited by THOS. E. WATSON and J. D. Atlanta, Ga., Thursday, January 9, 1908. “Now, you contend that the exception clause, which maimed the greenbacks, did not impair its value. Whatever impairs useful ness generally impairs value; and as the greenbacks could not pay the enormous sums due for customs duties and interest on the pub lic debt, while the demand notes could, the demand notes were more useful and more val uable than the greenback. “You say that the demand note entitled its holder to coin, and that it was, for that reason, as valuable as coin. “But did the demand note entitle its holder to coin? “By the act of February, 1862, the green back was made ‘lawful money,’ excepting in the two cases above specified. There was no exception in favor of the demand note. There fore, ‘the promise to pay’ which was on the face of the demand note entitled it to no more than the ‘promise to pay’ which was on the face of the greenback. “Not a word was said in the act of Con gress about the payment of demand notes, or greenbacks, in coin. “Therefore, your premise being erroneous, your conclusion is wrong. “You say that the interest on the bonds was made payable in coin for the purpose of ad- ding to the value of the bonds. Are you quite sure of that? Why, then, was not the prin cipal, as well as the interest, made payable in coin? Why make the interest payable in one kind of money and the principal in another? “The truth is that the whole thing was a money changers’conspiracy to create two kinds of currency, a cheap one and a dear one. The dear one they meant to control; the cheap one the people might have for a season. Then when the money kings had exchanged cheap paper money for bonds —dollar for dollar— and had raked in most of the coin, through the operation of the exception clause, they meant to have the terms of the contract changed, so that the bonds, which they had bought with de preciated paper, should be paid in coin. 1 ‘ I his scheme was successful, and the spoil of the money changers was prodigious. “The bonds, bought with paper which they had designedly depreciated, were paid for in coin, whose value they had relatively and enor mously increased. Then the scheme was pushed to its full development by the destruc tion of the cheap money. The dear money was left in the hands of the money changers, and by means of it they became supreme. They have brought on the panic—willfully, designed ly ior the sinister purpose of compelling the government to yield to their demand for asset currency. “If they don’t mind, they will get a fight on their hands, such as the bankers have not known since the of Andrew Jackson. “THOS. E. WATSON.” WALL STREET’S NEW SCARE. The “captains of finance” on Wail Street are addicted to the habit of “seeing things.” A few weeks ago they saw a money scar-city and started a flurry that came very nearly causing a great deal of trouble. Now they have another “vision.” They see an inflated currency, too much money, the danger of our arteries of trade being gorged with too much circulating medium. Some of the “captains” are falling over each other to buy stocks be fore the “inflation” causes an ascent in prices. Our present financial system needs correct ing in several places, but one of the things that needs attention first is “Wall Street” itself. Out here in Kansas when a man gets into the habit of “seeing things” to the extent that he causes his fellows trouble, he is called before the insane commission and put where he will do the least harm. When Wall Street “sees things to the extent that it can cause a panic oi a needless advance in the prices of stocks, some kind of commission should be created that will hold it within the bounds of reason or put the* ‘ ‘ captains ’ ’ where they • will be harmless to society and our financial interests. The last “scare,” however, insures that the panic is over and from this time forward the money in hiding will return to circulation. Farmers’ Advocate. Price five Cents.