Mexico weekly ledger., 1895-09-26
Vest and Silver.

From the Macon mo- Times.
A long dispatch from Washington,
published in the Kansas City Star of
Monday, announced that Senator Vest
had concluded that free coinage OF
silver at IS to / would be injurious to
this country, and that he would OPP
pose the proposition as set forth In
the Pertle Springs convention, but
would at the same time continue to
oppose the single gold standard. Two
days after the Star publication a
special telegram from Washington to
the st. Louis Republic confirmed h
first publication.
Senator Vest arrived in New York
Wednesday and fastened to say the
statement that he had changed his
views on the silver question was false.
In August, 1898, Senator Vest pub
lished a long article in the North
American ReUiep, one of the leading
magazines of the country, in which he
said:
The silver question must be settled
by repeating the Sherman act and re-
enactfng the Bland-Allison law, or by
repeating the Sherman act and chang
ing the legal ratio between the gold
and silver, with free and unlimited
coinage for silver.
The Senator then observes that the
market value of gold and silver at the
time was 24.3 to 1, and suggests a
ratio Of 20 to 1, ''until actual expert
ments show that this ratio will not re-
store commercial parity"
After this article was prepared and
before it was published free coinage
was discontinued in India, and Sena-
tor Vest added ga Supplementary
Statement" In which he said:
Since preparing the foregoing arti-
Gle the mints of India have been
closed to the free coinage of silver by
private owners. The fall in the price
of silver changes, of course, the figures
given in the article, but the argument
for free coinage with a change of
ratio Is not affected. .
There may be a permanent fall in
the price of silver, and this fact would
necessitate a greater ratio.
There has indeed been"a permanent
fall iii the price of silver"
In addition to the closing Of the
minis in India, the production of sill
yer increased from $197 ,O0O, 900 in 1892
to s214,00O 900 in 1894, so that the
commercial ratio of "a to 1 when Sem
ator Vest wrote has risen to 80 to l at
the present time.
Now, in view of this ''permanent
fall in the price of silver" which the
Senator said "would necessitate a
greater ratio" what would he now
offer? If, when the commercial value
was "a to 1 he suggested a legal ratio
of 20 to / as likely to effect CONNER
cial parity, what would he offer under
the present market valne of 80 to 1 as
likely to produce parity?
When Senator Vest declares he has
not changed his views on the silver
question, are we to understand he re-
fers to the views so clearly expressed
in the North american ReuieU article?
If SO he cannot support the Pertle
Springs 16 to 1 platform, because in
that article he declared: "The silver
question must be settled by . u
changing the legal ratio between gold
and silver" suggested a ratio of 20 to |
1, and concluded by saying ga perma-
nent fall in the price of silver would
necessitate a greater ratio"
Now is the Senator for 16 to /, or
for 20 to 1, as he suggested, or for a
ratio" which he declared
would be necessary in Ease of "a per-
manent fall in the price of silver"
If he is for 20 to l, or for a "greater
then why such a splutter over
the kilograms saying he was opposed
TO the Pertle Springs is to 1 PROPOSE
IL he is for 16 to /, why then
declare he has not changed his views?