The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1892-09-21

that fullest justice will never be done until
the same provisions are given to silver a.
are given to gold under existing law. Fail
ing to get this however, as one of the rep.
resentativeS upon this floor, will take less
than desire, if can do no better. II that
is the decision, think it is better for the
people and for the government that it
should get the difference in the seigniorage
and the bullion rather than that the mine
owners should get it. know that this bill
contains a provision that will give to the
government Of the United States that diff
ference, and that it will 60 into che treasury
to be there alike for the benefit of all the
people and all the taxpayers, and I prefer
that rather than it should go into the
pockets of the bulliOn-owners and bullion
producers. For that reason, if this bill
could be amended in some particulars, it
would be satisfactory to me and satisfactory
to the constituency that have the honor
to represent, and ought not TO be objection
able to the men who say they fear the free
COludSo VI 54FcI WILL uEAVo AIOn OAAo 4hnU hu
the gold that is in circulation.
I do not share in that conviction, nor do l
entertain any such fear and forebodings,
and it seems to me that our experience
ought to satisfy as that there Is no danger
from the free, unlimited coinage of silver.
Take the experience of France, and it ought
to drive from the mind of any reasonable
man any fear or fOreboding Of that charac-
tor. Why, look at the little government of
France with 100000 of people less than
we have, with an area One-sixteenth as large
as ours, and we find she has $270, ,0O0,O 900
more of silver than we have as people;
and instead Of driving the gold from France
with this great volume of silver, the French
people have $3.50, ,0O0, 900 more gold than we
have as a people. This should convince
every thinking man and every man who de-
sires to investigate and discuss this question
dispassiOnstely and fairly in the interest of
the people that he ought to get rid of such
forebodings and conieotures. Not only
that, Mr.. Speaker, but our experience under
the coinage act Of 1873 ought to satisfy all
that the dangers that were then sppre-
hended and predicted from the free coinage
Of silver were groundless. My objection to
this bill is these uncertainties in this re-
demption provision. Under the Bland
Allison act, we know that at the end of each
month we will get $2,O00,OOO of additional
money if we do not get s4,0O0,OOO, and in
period of twelve months we will get S24,-
100000 added to the volume of our cur
rency.
But under the provisions of this bill what
will we get2 Who can answer that question:
We all know that this is left in uncertainty
by reason Of the operation of the redemp-
tion feature of this bill. We know that in
the first month $4, 100000 would be coined,
but at the end Of that month or in the next
month the silver bullion may be surrendered
and the treasury notes taken up under the
provisions Of this bill, and it is possible that
every dollar then issued in treasury notes
may be taken up from time to time by the
surrender of silver bullion. Then at the
end of period of twelve months, instead of
the 1000, 900 we are getting under existing
law, we would not get dollar; and that,
too, without oollusion on the part of the SEQ
retary of the treasury, and without conspir-
aCy, but in the exercise of power, and a
legitimate power, that is given him under
this bill.
That, Mr.. Speaker, is serious and insu-
persble objection to this bill. That provis-
ion ought to be stricken out. No such
power should be given to the secretary of
the treasury, no such power should be given |
TO the bankers of Wall street, and no such
power should be given to the men who are
inimical TO silver and who do not believe in |
Sir, why are there anv dangers |