The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-11-13
MINNEAPOLIS. MINI, WEDNESDAY, NOV, Is, 1895.
NORTON ---TAUBI, Eek.
THE DEBATE CONTINUED.
Col. Norton's Reply-He Prefers
Greenbacks to Gold or Silver.

to Col. Norton it is only fair to give
the Coloners reply. We do this the
more cheerfully because it is an able
document and rendered in a friendly
spirit.-ED. REP
We told you, BRO. Taubeneck, that
there was screw loose in your logic
when you were talking about "rupees
and India wheat" But we hardly ex-
pected you to prove as vulnerable as
your second reply shows you to be. If
you had kept quiet, few unthinking
people might never have discovered
the eloose screw" Many people
might have thought you were really
capable of throwing light upon Ques-
tion which you say $50 many of our
Populist editors and speakers do not
understand" In our opinion, unless
you make better work of it than you
have in your two articles addressed to
us, the less you talk about it the bet
ter they will understa tand it.
In your first reply you said that the
India farmer took his bushel of wheat
to Liverpool and exchanged it for sill
yer enough to take back to India and
have it coined into rupees "acorth
$l.37."
There was no ifs, no conditions, no
qualifications.
You did not say so many rupees: but
you said rupees ''uorth $1.37 in legal
tender money in India.''
They do not use "dollars" and
'cents" in India. They use rupees, and
you said they were ",corh S1.37"-
which, of course, meant "$1.37' in
United States money.
You said that the American farmer
taking his bushel of wheat to Liverpool
got only silver enough to bring him 86
cents in the United States.
And the Uery point that you made was
that the India farmer with his. ru-
pees ''auorth $l.37'') had the advantage
of 81 cents over the American farmer,
because the latter got only Sc cen is
for his silver in this country!
Ard hM ,C0s the only point yoat under-
took TO make.
You quoted Senator Jones and Nor
ton FreWen to support the same propO-
sition.
You make the same point again in
this, your second reply. with the
illustration Of the Argentine farmer
in the case Of the Mexican cotton
planter.
And yet in your second reply (print-
ed herewith) you recite your illustra-
tiO nOf the American farmer who was
supposed to exchange his bushel Of
wheat for an ounce Of American sill
yer, which he takes to India, gets
coined into $1.37 worth" Of rupees and
brings them back to this country, thus
beating the Liverpool game" tell us
that his rupees ''acorth $1.37" in India
would shrink in value to So cents by
the time he got them to this country
and then gravely asks us: "Where
would your profit come in?''
Why, of course there would be no
profit in it. We based the supposition
upo1s yoor statement and used the illus
tration which we did simply to show
the utter absmdity of your proposition.
In other woros, you simply admit
that your India farmers rupees were
not worth $1.37."
You admit that they are worth only
sc cents! OF course silver coin that is
",co,th $1.37" in India will not shrink
in value to S6 cents by simply being
transported few thousand miles
across the ocean!
And the admission simply knocks
your whole argument, from beginning
to end. into a cooked hat.
1t is an admission that the India
farmer does not have ISL cents the ad
vantage of the American farmer
nj hn
Popui;st editors and speakers who do
not unde rstand'' this great "rupee
and India wheat" problem, we trust
you will make better job of it the
next time you undertake to enlighten
us on the subject.
The admission you are thus COM
PEELED to make also utterly refutes
your assertion that lit has the effect
of giving the wheat and cotton grow
erS in free coinage nations an export
bounty to the extent of the difference
between the coin and bullion price of
silver"
Whatever advantage there may be
does not accrue to the wheat and
cotton growers" anywhere on the
face of Gods green earth, but to the
arheot and cotton buyers of the creditor no.
tions of Europe!
An advantage that could not exist,
as against the American farmer, for a
single year if we had the sagacity and
good sense to cut loose from metallic
money and rise to the level of full le-
gal tender greenbacks-and plenty of
them!
Talk about the advantage" which
the Japanese, the Chinese, the Mexi-
can or the Argentine farmer has over
The American farmer! Poor devils, all
of them-Japanese, Chinese, Mexican,
Argentine and American! There is
not tuppence difference in the con-
dition of the whole lot! They are all
skinned, robbed, plucked and plunder-
ed-and no device for that purpose is
more potent, more cunning, more
devilish than that of metallic mon
ey," be it gold or silver. or both!
AS to an amendment to the consti-
tuition for a graduated income tax"
we do not believe that we need it. All
we need is an amendment to the Su-
preme Court. Let the amendment
consist in the substitution of few