New-York tribune., 1890-06-27
TIE DECISION on SILTER.

The House has sustained Speaker Reed ana
the decision of the Republican caucus, ana
there is an end of the free coinage business Tor
This session. Indeed, the majority is so large
that. even if there should be no action at this
session and the subject should be again brough'
mn at the next session of the same Congress-
silver men will probably, have the good sense
not to insist upon free coinage. WIN MUCH
less than majority in the House, ana Ger
tainty that the Presidents veto would rehder
a two-thirds vote necessary, the silver pro-
ducers will see the eXpedienoy of taxing what
they can get Had they been wise, silver men
would never have departed from the agree
ment to support the Jones bill, which was more
than they should have asked or should now
GET. 1t is a measure less safe, and for that
reason less desirable for silver producers, than
tbe House bill, and yet far preferable TO the
Free Coinage Act for which silver men IN Con-
gress have voted
The estimate of Speaker Reed proved ac-
curate. and the free coinage Republicans were
almost exactly balanced by Democrats VINO OPP
posed free coinage. But the geographical lin
It's of the division in each party are remark
able. Reckoning Mr.. FeatheIstone of Arkan-
Republicans who voted for unlimited coinage
of silver. Of these only seven represented
silver-producing States, or less than third,
namely, two from California (out of four Re-
pubicanS). and one each from Nevada, oregon
Montana, Colorado and south Dakota But
Kansas, which raises no silver cast every one
of its seven votes for unlimited coinage, and
Nebraska its three votes, making ten from
those two States which produce no silver The
rest came from Illinois, two out of thirteen
Republicans, one out of four from Missouri,
one ont of three from Indiana, and one out OF
sixteen from Ohio. or in all five out OF thirty
six Republican votes from these four States.
He Nho would account for the wanderinSs OF
Kansas and Nebraska members must look, not
for silver mines in those States, but for Farm
ers Alliances and the peculiar notions which
certain demagogues have led them to adopt
On the other hand, every Democratic vote
against free coinage came from State touched
by salt water. New-YorII gave ten Demo
cratic votes. and would have given several
more if members had respected the will OF the
people here; Pennsylvania gave four, New
Jersey, Massachusetts and Maryland two each,
and Connecticut and South Carolina one each
1t is but fair TO say that some other Democrats
might have voted the same way had their party
been responsible for legislation. But as the
records stand the Republican party votes more
than six to one against unlimited coinage, while
the Democratic party votes about five to one
in favor of unlimited coinage Of silver.
The question now is whether the Conference
Committee will compromise away an essential
part of the important victory which the Re
publicans of the House have achieved. At
Washington the impression is that the com
mittee will consent to a purchase of $500 600
silver bullion monthly, and the issue of cor
tifcates redeemable in "coin'' without bullion
redemption The statement that the President
would sign such measure, if thrust upon him
| by Republican majOrticS in the two houses,
may or may not be correct. But no such meas
ure should be sent to him by Republican votes.
| At the best, il can only be considered n make
shift, cXcusable for the moment. and safe only
| for a year or two. Even safety for short
time will hardly he conceded by prudent
fnanciers. who know how swiftly money mar
ketS discount possible dangers. Uncertainty
and hesitation would not promote industries
nor bring foreign capital into the country for
investment and may not keep the large for
| eign capital already invested here. A bill that
| involves danger and doubt is not one that a
| Republican Congress ought TO send 10 a Re
| publican President.