Hopkinsville Kentuckian. [volume] (Hopkinsville, Ky.) 1889-1918, 1895-06-14

keep ootn gold ana snver In concur
rent circulation as the money of the
people. I never understood any advo-
cate Of the double standard to contend
that II was necessary in order to have
bimetallisn to keep both metals IL
Concurrent circulation; that is at til.
same time and at the same ratio. That
Is not the contention we are maxim
] That is not necessarily Dime llisT
You may have bimetallism and NJ
have both metals circulating at an
equality of value at the same time.
That bimetallism may exist with only
| one metal in circulation is fact which
absolutely cannot be successfully con-
troverted. We may have both metals
in circulation at equal values and a
corner may be made on gold. and If
that be done silver takes it's place, for
silver is money as well as gold. Or If
a corner be made on silver, then gold
comes out from it's hiding place in an
swer to the universal demand made for
it by the people.
| The Debtors Obligation.
There is where the Importance of
what is termed the option comes.
What is meant by the option is the
right of one person to contract to pay
in either money he chooses. The law
| of trade, the law of fairness, the law
OF justice, requires that that right of
option shall belong to the debtor and
not the creditor. If owe you thou
sand dollars, it is | who should have
the option, 1t is who should have the
right to say whether / will pay you in
one or the other of the lawful moneys
of this country. If the option is given
to pay debt either in silver or gold,
who should hold and who should exer-
else, that option? Do you say that the
creditor is entitled to it? If so, it is no
option at all.
If owe you thousand dollars and
both gold and silver are good money
under the law of the land, should l not
have the right to discharge that debt
or meet that obligation with either
thousand dollars of gold or silver? No,
says the gold advocate, the right of
option belongs to the creditor, and
when you come to pay him thousand
dollars he says give it to me'in gold,
and | say | have not got it, but have
it in silver. You refuse to take that
and send me off to find thousand dol
lars in gold. One is as much money as
the other under the law. / find but
one man who has thousand dollars in
gold, and am bound to get it, SO l am
bound to take it on his terms. / am
bound to pay him what rate of interest
he sees fit to charge me, for under
xyOI min of 10 ho
in which you are willing to accept pay
ment That is unfair, but the right of
option by the gold advocate is claimed
to belong to the debtor, and then say
you must keep the silver and gold at
an equality of value. How can I when
you give the right of option to the man
to whom the debt is due who demands
the dearer metal? That increases the
demand for gold and sends the price
of gold up. Refusing to take silver
lessons the demand for silver and sends
the price of silver down lower, and you
force still wider apart in value the two
money metals in the country. But
when you give the right of option to
the man who pays the debt, either one
answers his purpose. He at once says
give me thousand dollars in silver.
1t pays my debt as well as gold and it
is easier money to get control of. By
giving that right of option in favor of
the debtor you maintain the equality
in value between the metals by in
creasing the demand for the cheaper
metal and lessening the demand for
the dearer metal About proposition
as plain as that there can be no con-
troversy.
The Assassination of Silver.
But it does not stop there. He says
bimetallism never was maintained by
any people. challenge the statement
for lack of correctness. 1t is not true.
He slaps history in the face who
makes the statement. The history of
the world shows that from 1903 to 1875
France did maintain successfully BIZ
metallism in it's truest and broadcast
sense. In that French realm silver
and gold for seventy odd years foated
on even terms of value. History of
our own country refutes his statement.
The history of this people shows that
from 1892 down to 1878, when the re-
publican congress, by more than a
two-thirds republican majority in both
houses, at the dead hour of midnight,
without warning to the American peo-
Pile, without notice of this contem-
plated assassination, killed silver. For
eighty-one years the two metals in this
land of ours, with minis open to both
alike, on even terms, had hoated both
as the final redemption money of the
American people. Who struck silver
down? / have told you. A republican
congress, republican by two-thirds ma
jority in both branches How was 1t
stricken down? Not openly and in the
bright light of day, but at the witch
ing hour of midnight, an hour fitted
for so dastardly deed-at that hour
on the 12th day of February, 1873, this
act, which was denominated as the
greatest crime of this or any other age
by the present secretary of the treas
,,rv or whoever IL was that made that