MR.. IGRAHAM IN RALEIGH.
{"character_count": 5137, "word_count": 935, "ccnet_language_score": [0.9765999913215637], "ccnet_perplexity": [1131.0], "fasttext_language": ["en"]}
/


the Court House in this City on Monday last


He came out fer all the leading measures of his


party. Upon the question of the tariff. he seemed


to coincide with the present opinions of Mr. Clay


alhoughhe voted against the existing law That


law, he said, had some Objectionable features, bui


he would have voted for it had it been coupled


with the distribution bill. A re these things so
| We join no issue of veracity with Mr.. Graham,


but is there nothing in the runor that he voted


gains che law of 1912 in obedience to the prompt
ings of personal motivesi Was he not told by


his particular friend, Mr.. Mangum, that such a
law would be unpopular in North Carolina, and


that its passage being certain without his vote he


had better not vote for it, for that if the ensuing


Legislature should have Whg majority, Mr..


Badger might endeavor to supplant him in the


Senate, and that this passage in his political ca


reer would have some redeeming features to pre-


sent to the eyes of the democratic members Is
there nothing in these things? The people have
a right to know the motioes of public servants.
Let the truth come out. But what sort of dis
tribution law did Mr.. Graham want2 What sort


of an one does he desire now2 He says he is a


friend to the old States; that they ceded their pub
lie lands in trust to the Federal Government for


certain purposes; and that they have right


now, those purposes having been fulfilled, to the


clear proceeds of the sales of the residue of the


lands aforesaid. This is the doctrine . Now let


US look at the practice. The Wing Congress,


with Mr. Clay at its head, passes law for what ?


To distribute equally the proceeds? No such
thingl The law, after gioing 0acay millions of
acres to the new States, secured to. them also ten
per centum on all the sales over and above what


was divided among the old States This is the
policy of MIR. Graham, and we challenge denial
of it either from him or his friends. This is the
way he has of doing justice 10 the Old Thirteen
Let US simplify his policy. Suppose, for instance,
the existence of copartnership of thirteen men.
Each of them has lands enough in his own right,
and some ofthem have enough and to spare. The
partnership becomes involved, and the latter, from
desire to cancel their joint obligations, and to
uphold the concern, throw parcel of lands into
the hands of all, to be sold and the proceeds put
into the common drawer. In the meantime how
ever thirteen others are admitted into the firm; and
after the debts are all paid of, proposition comes
up to divide equally to each member the proceeds
of these sales Would such proposition be a
fair one2 How could it be2 Would the thir.
teen who came in as Of yesterday, who had borne
none Of the earlier burdens of the firm, and who
had paid nothing as equivalent for these lands,
be entitled 10 an equal share with the original
thirteen in the distribution of the proceeds
Most certainly they would not. But what would
be thought of proposition not merely TO diride
equally, but to gire one hundred dollars IN t6ei
thousand more to the 7se1o members of the firm
And yet this case is essentially analogous TO the
distribution policy Of Mr.. Graham We might |
say more upon this head, but we have neither
space nor time


Mr.. Graham also contrasted the expenditures
If the Federal and Democratic administrations,
md upon this point we will pay our RESPECTS to
linn in due time. 1t is enough to say that here
lie made many unfair statements. He knows
hat an appropriation is one thing, and expendi-
ures another, and he knows also that he said
lothing of the enormous public debt of more
han twenty millions which the Federal Wings
ave fastened upon the country.


We thought him exceedingly feeble both upon
he Bank and the Tariff question. He showed
IS no constitutional power to create a Bank-no
ecessity for high protective tariff As to the
Bank, we suppose of course that he relies upon
rrcedents And what are theyl Can they es-
ablish what the constitution never sanctioned
These precedents upon which the Wings hang
o many of the remnants of their tattered princi-
les, are dead branches upon the great tree of the
Constitution, and the sooner they are Topped off
ne better.


AfersMr Graham had finished his remar ks.
ames B. Shepard, Esq. was called upon to reply ;
him. This he did in a courteous but forcibIe
nd convincing manner. He exposed the un- ,
'undness of many of MIR. Grahau,'s positions !
nd arguments upon Bank, Tariff and Distribu- !
on, and reviewed in connection with these sub ,
cts, portions of the political career of Mr. Gra-
am, as well as of his candidate Mr. Clay In +,
le course of this review he intimated that Mr.. .
iraham had, on certain occasion, voted against =
estng in the people the right of electing their f
wn Governor, and called upon the gentleman to =
ome out with full statement of the whole mat .
r. Here the reply of Mr.. Graham was ex- :,
sedingly feeble and unsatisfactory. He admit +,
d that he a'oted in the Legislature against tile :,
reGt popular principle of giving the election of :,