Newspaper Page Text
The Mail Subsidy Steal.
In 1892, The Jeffersonian heard the Hon.
Jas. H. Blount, of Macon, Georgia, deliver a
passionate protest against that form of public
robbery known as the “Mail Subsidy.” Mr.
Blount was then, and had been for many years,
Chairman of the Committee on Post Offices
and Post Roads. He was familiar with every
detail of the service. He was a master of the
Subject upon which he addressed the House.
The Jeffersonian was within ten- feet of this
honest congressman when he made the most
strenuous efforts to defeat the railroads who
were proposing to pillage the Treasury.
Mr. Blount assured the House, in the most
positive manner, that there was no justice
in the Subsidy. He said the people got nothing
in return for it. He declared that the Subsidy
was simply extra pay for doing that which
the railroads were already under contract to
do.
In spite of the earnest opposition and the
positive statements of Chairman Blount, the
railroads, aided by venal congressmen, got
what they were after.
The Southern railroad has been able, through
Chambers of Commerce and other similar bod
ies, to make the impression that the South
could not secure the benefit of fast mails, unless
the Southern railroad was allowed to get that
Subsidy. The impression has been made that
it was because of this Subsidy that the South
got fast mail from the North and East. This
is the excuse put forward by such railroad com
gressmen as Livingston and Jim Griggs, and
scores of others. Yet, the literal fact is, that
the Southern railroad did not make any change
in its schedules on account of the Subsidy, and
did not put on an extra train.
The correspondent, whose letter was pub
lished in the November number of the Jeffer
sonian Magazine, explained why it was that
the mail for Atlanta, and points South, did not
arrive nine hours earlier.
He stated that the reason was that the
Southern railroad threw off this mail at
Greensboro, N. C., where it to wait nine
hours for another train on the Southern sys
tem. The correspondent explained how it was
that the mail could have been transferred to
the train of another railroad company (The S.
A. L.), which made close connection at Ches
ter, and thus the nine hours saved.
The Jeffersonian does not ask its readers to
take its own word for the statement that the
Southern railroad made no change of its sched
ules and put on no extra train because of the
Subsidy. Elsewhere in this issue will be
found official evidence on that very question,
furnished by the Post Office Department, itself,
to Congressman A. C. Shuford, of North Caro
lina, when that gentleman sought information
upon the subject.
It will be seen that the Post Office Depart
ment states, positively, that the Southern rail
road had not changed its schedules nor put on
an extra train because of the Sudsidy.
In this connection, it should be borne in
mind that the Post Office Department never
has recommended the appropriation known as
the Mail Subsidy. On the other hand, the
government has, all along, endeavored to let
the people understand that they got nothing in
return for the Subsidy and that it was a mere
gift to the railroads. In other words, the gov
ernment’s position in the matter is precisely
the same as that which was maintained by
Chairman Blount in 1892.
Now is a good time for the people to look
up the record of such Congressmen as Living
ston, Griggs, Tom Bell, Wiley of Alabama, and
various other patriots who have been so ready
to oblige the corporations at the expense of
the people.
H * *
You will miss it if you don't read
Premium Offers, which appear on
another page.
WATSON’S WEEKLY JEFFERSONIAN.
Try A Criminal Warrant.
Ty Ty, Ga., November 11,1907.
Hon. Thomas E. Watson,
Dear Sir and Friend: Do excuse this bother
I impose upon you. Can I not get my money
out of the bank I deposited to draw on? A
check was turned down a few days ago. Can
I sue the bank and get my money?
I refuse these certificates for my cotton, and
I am threatened with a suit to make me set
tle a note. It seems that the “something” is
going to flatten our common people (govern
ment). Any word from you would help us
down here, and all of us are Watson men and
women. Very truly one of the old Tenth Dis
trict. ROBERT J. PARKER.
Answer.
November 12, 1907.
Mr. Robert J. Parker, Ty Ty, Ga.
My Dear Sir: The way* in which certain
bankers are imposing upon depositors by re
fusing to cash checks is not only an outrageous
injustice, but is a crime. A bank which will
not pay its depositors has no right to keep its
doors open. Such a bank is insolvent, and if
it continues to do business, receiving deposits,
it is violating the penal code. The officers of
the bank could be arrested for misdemeanor
and could be given a term of penal servitude
for their failure to comply with the law.
Again the implied contract governing the
relation of depositor and the bank of deposit,
is that the deposit itself is a trust fund, which
the bank will hold subject to order of depos
itor. By check, or in person, the depositor has
the right to draw his money out, at any time—
complying with the reasonable rules prescribed
by the bank for the keeping of its accounts.
These rules of the bank cannot be changed
to the injury of the depositor after his deposit
is made, unless he voluntarily consents. The
bank is bound by whatever regulations it had
prescribed for the drawing of checks against
the account, previous to the acceptance of the
deposit. Therefore, if you have a deposit in
any bank and draw your check for a part or
all of your money—the bank must honor
your check by paying out your money upon
it. or their refusal to do so amounts to a breach
of the trust.
In law, where one is in possession of the
property of another, which property is legally
demanded by the owner, a refusal to deliver
the property to the owner amounts to a con
version; that is to say, the person who is in
possession of another’s property, which he
should surrender and does not, converts it to
his own use.
Now, under the statute law of Georgia, a
banker who refuses to give the depositor his
money, when the depositor calls for it in com
pliance with the prescribed rules of the bank —
is guilty of larceny after trust, because he has
converted the property of the depositor to a
different use than that contemplated when the
deposit was made.
A banker, whether he is cashier, or president,
or director, who is a party to this criminal
method of treating depositors, can be sent to
the penitentiary for a term of years. Those
banks which are refusing to honor drafts of de
positors, and are meeting the just demartds of
the depositors with Clearing House Certificates
—are simply bluffing the people whose money
they have used and are setting at naught the
criminal statutes.
The newspapers which represent the cor
porate interests, are doing their level best to
misrepresent the situation, and to prevent the
people from learning the truth about the rot
tenness of our National Banking System. I
venture to say if you will give that cashier a
good look in the eye and tell him “If you don’t
get that money I will take out a warrant for
you and the president of the bank” —you will
get your money. Yours truly,
THOS. E. WATSON.
Our Financial System.
Here is the way it works
The National banker persuades the Gov
ernment to allow him to issue his promises-to
pay, as Money; the business men borrow these
promises-to-pay, and .give the banker their
interest-bearing promise-to-pay for the use of
the banker’s promise-to-pay; then when the
business men cannot redeem their promises to
pay, the banker issues another one of his prom
ises-to-pay.
The first of these promsies-to-pay, which
the business man borrowed, was called Mon
ey ; the second issue of these promises-to-pay
was called Clearing House Certificates.
Do you now see how the National banker
plays the game?
Did the world ever witness anything like it?
The National banker signs up a lot of prom
ises to pay. He lends these,’ as money, and
the borrower who uses them gives the banker
his promise to pay. Then, when the borrower
of the banker’s promise cannot keep his own
promise, the banker soothes a humbugged and
exploited public by issuing another lot of his
promises to pay. God! What a crazy system!
And what a patient lot of humbugged and
exploited people the American people are!
But the Government must not be allowed to
issue any promises to pay.
That would never, NEVER do.
The merchant must not do it. The profes
sional man must not do it. The cotton factor
must not do it. The farmer must not do it.
The banker, alone, must do it. Let him issue
his bank notes, which are his promises to pay.
Let all the rest of us borrow those notes, and
pay interest to the banker. Then, when we
cannot pay our notes, and the banker
cannot give back to depositors the
funds which have been loaned to some specula
tor, the banker will issue another lot of his
promises to pay, and will try to look like a
good Christian while pocketing interest for
the use of this second series of his promises
to pay.
And just to think that Hoke Smith’s organ,
the Atlanta Journal, is committed to this cra
zy, dishonest and profligate system of alleged
finance and wants to give the National banker
additional authority to deluge the business
world with bogus money!
If I were Governor Hoke Smith, and wanted
to go to the Senate, I wouldn’t lose much time
in telling the people of Georgia where I stood
on this money question.
The Atlanta Journal favors the impudent
demands of the National bankers as set forth
in that amazing scheme for “asset curerncy.”
All sorts of rotten railroad stocks and bonds,
and other corporation “securities” are to be
piled up in Washington, and against this heap
of accumulated “securities,” are to be issued
additional millions of the bankers’ promises-to
pay which the business world must accept as
money.
Just think of issuing money based upon Har
rimanized or Morganized railroad stocks and
bonds!
Suppose money had been issued against
the stock of the Chicago and Alton railroad
before Harriman looted it. Or against the
stock of the Central railroad before Pat Cal
houn’s robber band seized it. Or against
Amalgamated Copper, six months ago. Sup
pose the Government had allowed the rav
enous National bankers to have issued notes
on such speculative stocks as those—how
could the National treasury have stood the
strain of redeeming the worthless promises
to-pay of the National bankers?
Such a thing would have plunged the
Government itself into bankruptcy!
If the infamous plot of the Associated Na
tional Bankers is successful—as the Atlanta
(Continued on page twelve.)
PAGE NINE