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

for the district OF kentucky. with MS
Office at Louisville. Mr.. Smith wrote
Mr. Carlisle a letter on june 18, 1890,
in which he said; "The Farmers AL.
lance of Graves county are incensed
against you because you voted against
the Sherman bill, which provided for
the purchase of four and half mil
lion of silver bullion every month.
They Ire mad at you, and want an
answer from you in the nature az all
explanation of that vote, and / want
it for publication" Mr.. Smith got his
answer, and hold it in my hand. !
mean to be fair; l will not read ex-.
tracts from 1t, but will read it all, If it
be possible, for Mr.. Carlisle himself,
who is a master of the English lam
guage, to state proposition so plainly
that an idiot can understand it, will
leave it to you to decide if he did not
succeed in his effort in this letter. 1t
reads:
Hon. w. NJ. Smith, Mayfield, Ky.--Dear Sir:
Your favor of the 18th just received. Every
democrat In the senate voted against the silver
bill, twas finally amended and reported by
the conference committee, because we believed
II was worse than the existing law II the
Farmers Alliance OF Graves county believe
that this republican measure, which suostan-
tally stops the coinage OF the silver dollar
afer one year, is better than the democratic
law OF 1873, they are of course entitled TO their
opinion, but do not agree with them. Wnen
the original house bill was under consideration
in the senate, l voted to amend IL SO as 10 pro-
vide for the free and unlimited coinage OF the
silver dollar, and that amendment was adopted.
The house. however, refused to agree to this
amendment, and then conference committee
was appointed, which struck out free coinage
entirely, and this is the bill voted against,
send you by mail all three OF the bills Very
truly, JOHN @. CARLISLE.
Now submit 10 common fairness, it
may be that his vote for free and un-
limited coinage of silver bill on
November S, 1877, does not prove that
he was friend of the silver metal,
and it may be that his speech on Feb
ruary, 21, 1878, does not prove that he
was friendly to the silver metal, but
it is possible for us to believe that that
letter which he wrote to Mr.. Smith in
1890 meant nothing too. Put them all
together, and if they don't prove that
he was, on those three several dates,
as stanch friend of the unlimited
coinage of silver as 1 or you, or any
other man, how is it possible to
prove anything by the English Ian
uage? ! subpena no witness against
him except himself, offer no evidence
except that of record, tender no hear
say testimony, submit the imperish-
able records that are in print and leave
the question for you to determine.
This Is the Answer.
/ am not going to rest on that. Mr..
Carlisle had perfect right to hold
those views from 1877 to 1890; he had
an unquestioned right to change them
since 1890; he had a perfect right to
come before the people of Kentucky
and say he was mistaken, was deluded,
was in error, that not the double, but
the siJ8e1e standard is the true one.
No one had any ground to complain If
he had said that, but leave him to
reconcile his present statement with
his written and recorded utterances as
best he may be able.
That Mr. Carlisle has stated the gold
side of this controversy strongly no
fair-minded man can afford to deny.
have not lived long enough, ! have not
come ifFtontact with men enough in
the mQ%e than half century that
measures the life that lies behind me;
have never met, seen or known a man
who had more ability to state his case
than the present secretary of the
treasury. He of all men l have ever
known can probably come the nearest
to making the worst appear the better
cause. That he has stated his case
strongly, forcibly and plausibly,
cheerfully admit; but that he has in
troduced any new elements into this
discussion / am unable to discover.
For instance, he tells you that the
present monetary system under which
we live is not a perfect system. He
says it is faulty. He tells you that
when the present financial crisis struck |
us in 1893 we were possessed of every |
substantial requisite of prosperity and |
safety except monetary system that
was not safe or sound. 1t was the |
same system then that you have to-
day. 1t was single gold standard !
that day and it is single gold stand
ard this day. / assert that not sim
gle statute law has been put upon the |
books of this country since that time |
that at all changes, alters, or modifies
our monetary system. Mr.. Carlisle de-
clares that in 1893 when the crisis |
struck-ns our lack of safety consisted |
in the fact that our monetary system |
was not sound one. Then l answer |
that it is not sound now. Yet he tells |
us in the same breath that you must |
preserve and hold on to the monetary |
system as you have it to-day. You |
must not change it, and yet it is not
safe or a sound one.
He tells you further that in 1884
when the ratio of sixteen grains of
silver to one grain of gold was in ex-
istence, when the minis of the country |
were open to the coinage of both silver
and gold on even terms without dis
elimination, that condition drove this
country to the single gold standard,
ansTthat from 1884 to 1873 we had
binor Int q Gin o1a r0ld standard / |