The Iola register. [volume] (Iola, Allen County, Kansas) 1875-1902, 1893-09-08
SHERMAN ON SILVER.
The Ohio Senator Explains Some
Disputed Points.
Eze LIS Opposed to Free Coinage. Which Is
Net Bimetallism, But will Vote
for Repeal-senator Stew
art Answered.

routine morning business in the senate
the bin for the repeal of the silver pur
chase act was taken up and Mr.. Sher
znan proceeded to address the senate
he said that if the repeal of the pur-
chasing clause of the act of July,
zS90, were the only reason for the
extraordinary session, it would
seem TO him insufficient 1t was,
however, justified by the existing
financial stringency. On one thing
congress and the people agreed, and
that was that both gold and silver
should be continued in use as money.
Monometallism pure and simple had
never gained a foothold in the United
States If senators wanted cheap
money and an advance in prices free
coinage of silver was the way to do it,
ont they should not call it bimetal-
7iSu-
Mr. Sherman then proceeded to dis
<Bss the history of the act that bears
his name. He was not in favor of the
free coinage of silver and regarded it
zS another name for the monometallism
Gf silver and was only in favor of
1he purchase of silver for purposes of
NatfAEnE- llc IC4uluuCu SCu6ICIS IfldG
VEhen they criticised the law that
WAS misnaned after him they should
EUuHe Hember that this law on the statute
books was far better than either the
kozse bill or that passed by the senate.
The president, Mr.. Sherman went
Ca1, had set forth the decline in the
va!ue OF silver. but had failed to give
The causes OF that decline. If he had
taken d broader view of the causes of
Che decline he could have explained it
all II was due to the fact that this
country was called upon to pay
of debts payable in gold. England
WIS Che great creditor country and
Eszgland's less in the Argentine repub-
1ic bad TO be made good She returned
american securities andSdemanded the
gold needed to save her own institu-
tons from going down. For the first
time also in a number OF years the bal |
sxnce of trade was against this country |
AND it had to make the difference good |
After discussing other matters con-
tgI6uting to the present condition, Mr.. |
Sherman declared that an erroneous |
impression had been created when it |
WIS claimed that the Sherman law was |
the cause of all the trouble and this, |
he said, with all due Difference to Mr.. |
Cleveland Still the fact was that |
congress must deal with a situation
and not a message. He believed in
ffgiving the devil his due" and was
neade 10 stand by the law. not as
zueasEre in which he took any special |
pride for he was compelled to prepare
1S in order to prevent disastrous legis-
fatlou, but without this law what
would the country have done III 1891
and 1892 had it been called upon
then TO meet the difficulties now
staggering it? He was not a new
convert to the repeal of the law
ard a year ago he had introduced bill
TO suspend the operations of the law.
At was worded almost exactly like that
OF Mr. Voorhees,. Why did not the dem
ocratic senators then see the dangers
they ROW see and come to the help of
the republicans when they sought to
suspend the law? Not a democratic
vote was to be had and the democrats
must answer why.
This, Mr.. Sherman said, was a cur
rcncy famine, not the fear that the
money of the country was not good,
and the people should not be deceived
AS to the reasons for the repeal He
did not believe the repeal of the law |
would in any considerable degree re-
eieve the country from the existing
Its repeal would ease the
money market from the dreaded fear
Of the free coinage of silver
Mr.. Sherman reviewed the legislation {
of 1878, and denounced the manner in
which Ernest Seyd, the English econ
oEnist, had been denounced in connec-
@fon with the matter. Seyd played no =
part in that legislation. The statement
was infamously false that Seyd or any,
cne else paid s5OO,OOO to congress to Sc
cTzTe the demonetization of silver. Seyd
rVas bimetallist, as shown by refer
SEsoe TO his published books; he was
7zse of the leading financial experts
If the world; he occupied an I
honorable position in London and I
ga honored one wherever he was I
known, and he believed him to have
ae=en an honest, sincere, uncorruptible | I;
zzzn- Sevd had never visited America T
E5sal the bill was almost through con- !
yresE- and it was infamous that the
charge should be so frequently made
hat public men had been bribed into
passing the bill of 1873.
Hereafter" said Mr. Sherman, f
when any man makes such state 2
Rent about this legislation l shall o
aiznply say that it is a falsehood and t
brand it So" o
1t is strange" said Mr.. Sherman, C
that on the vote of this bill that the Il
senator from Nevada o
Ar. Stewart) voted for it and /, the \
ievii-fsh, voted against it." b
The last remark was in reference to o
n epithet applied to Mr. Sherman dur a
ng the debate in the house last week.
Mr. Stewart retorted that in due
iIne he would explain how he came to
-ote for the bill
There was nothing surreptitious u
bout il" said Mr. Sherman. with much u
Earmth, and no fact can be proven Il
nore clearly. The statement so often
made to the contrary is a falsehood "
nd lie; care not by whom made. 1t ID
vas sometimes said that Gen. Grant II
new nothing of this demonetization. o'
What of it? Gen. Grant was not a On
In2ncier, but his secretary of the treas oi
nv wrote report urging the passage
Il such a bill In the face of such
eport, how could members of congress
lead ignorance? / would rather stand pa
ere and say that l voted knowingly ~
nd nnderstandingly than shirk the re- %
possibility by pleading the baby act" III
He quoted from sneeehes made bv NJ | la