The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-05-21

the Tribune would be oracle. time and
! time again. That is exactly what the
Tribune has denied repeatedly, and in
sault upon The Herald's alleged ignor-
ance. But little more than a week
ago the Tribune said editorially:
when the silver dollar was de-
monetiZed by this country and Ger
many-deprived of it's legal tender
quality-in 1873, ETC."
Last Sunday morning it treated US
to this lesson on coinage. Speaking of
the silver dollar under the act of 1873,
which a week before he declared was
deprived Of its legal tender quality,
he says:
There was then in circulation the
silver dollar Of regular coinage which
was a full legal tender for all debts"
A short time ago the Tribune was
asked whether its statement that the
silver dollar had been demonetized
was not mistake. 1t answered that
this was no mistake. And when The
Herald showed that it was the metal.
silver, that had been demonetized and
that the silver dollar was money, real
money of the United States, the silver
jumping jack of the Tribune abused
The Herald for its argument, and de-
clared that the silver dollar was not
money but only token coin," Sub
sidiary coin," and ''just the same as a
greenback."
We do not believe the writer of the
contradictory and arrogant stuff in
the Tribune knows anything about
the silver question, except those
general principles that formed the
basis of congressional and other
speeches over twenty years ago.
When cornered on his egregious
blunders he calls his opponents
base born,' as though that was
argument. He tells eastern papers
that differ with him to 'go to kinder
garten," as though that was a reply.
And now, on a plain question of law,
he calls us too technical as if that
answered the quotations we made from
the coinage laws of the United States
We have proved several of his state
ments in answer to questions to settle
disputes TO be erroneous and mislead-
ing. If he had ordinary discretion he
would admit his mistake or be silent
But no. He has become so accustomed
to playing the oracle that he must
needs pretend to be wise, and assume
that other folks are fools, so he ex-
poses himself to sharp rejoinders which
appear to sting him to the quick
That is all right and he should recog-
nize that other folks than Lawyer
Brown may be ''slashed.''
Let us make a few final comparisons.
He says:
1.-THE trade dollar was never intended
for circulation in this country
What does the law of 1873 say?
THE silver coins OF the UnAted States
shall be trade dollar, a half dollar
or 1lfty cent piece" etc, ETC."
That is to say, then, a silver coin
of the United States" was never in
tended for circulation, in the United
States. But we quoted that provision
of the law in answer to his statement
that under the act of 1873.
1.-THE silver coinage was restricted to
fractional coins, halves, quarters ans
Dimes
Now when shown that the trade dor
lar was included among the silver CONS
of the United States ana made legal
tender to the amount of five dollars.
he says we are 'ttoo technical" and
talks about what the trade dollars
were coined for, after declaring that
they were not coined at all.
That is the kind of silver acrobat
that puts on such airs of superiority
toward local and EASTERN papers, which !
see through his plumbers and desire
that fact instead of fiction may go out
to the public in reference ITO the silver
question
If necessary we can produce a. score
OF contradictory statements made by |
the same blunderer, who would do well
himself to Ego to a kindergarten if
second childhood was not too far gone
to make it possible for him to be more
and less presumptuous.