The Monticellonian., 1895-08-09
Reply to Secretary Morton.

and recent converts to the single gold standard as the basis of our financial scheme, arc endeavoring 10 show that the great mass of the people are ignorant of the first principles of finance. These par ties are much mistaken in regard to qualifications of the people to judge of these questions. The l people have been reading and studying these questions, and many of these new fedged patri- otS who now assume to be par ex- cellently honest are very anxious so begin q campaign of education that they may educate the igno- rant masses.
 Some of the arguments they use are amusing, and some are an in- suit to the intelligence of the American people.
 As evidence of the truth of this assertion l would call attention to a recent emanatiOn from one of the Cabinet officers, the Hon. J. Sterling Morton, who presents an object lesson to illustrate more forcibly his position on the money question. His article is publisLed in The Republic of July 25, and The Republic prefaces the letter with commendation. "That he is probably the most able and ready letter writer of the present administration and who is gener- ally recognized ns a hard hitter when he hits"
 Now, get the article and read it. Here is in substance his object lesson: He presents the case of Il good citizen in Wyoming, who ad- vertised for sale, cash in hand, d large lot of land. Many citizens arrived at the hotel the night be- fore the sale, l6 of whom had each Sl ,000 in silver and one man had Sl, ,O00 in gold coin. That night the hotel burned and the silver and gold coin were all melted and became as bullion. Now what does our wise Secretary say in or der to prove that the silver dollar is dishonest money? He admits, under the law, as it stands, the i 1000 silver standard dollars will buy as much land as the Sl ,000 in gold. But after the coin is so melted as to become bullion, he says the Sl6,000 in silver is worth only about SS,O00, while the gold bullion is worth nearly the sl ,000 And yet our learned Secretary failed to inform his readers that the reason of this was because the gold owner could go to the Mint and have his bullion recoined but the silver owner, by reason of the law of 1873, could not have his bullion recoined. Now will he dare deny that if this incident had happened prior to 1873 the loss to l the silver men would have been about the same as the gold man?
 You see he measures the gold bullion according to it's value, having the privilege of free recoin- age, and measures the silver at it's commercial value, with the privil- ege of recoinage denied under the law, and yet with this kind of sub tertuge he attempts to deceive the people by intimating that gold is sound money and silver unsound, when common honesty would have impelled him to have stated that, by reason of the discrimination in favor of gold, the silver men lost. If I understand properly the posi- ton of the bimetallists, it is that good faith requires that silver be first restored to its position prior to 1873, and then if within a req. sonable time the parity of the two metals cannot be retained, then al- ter the ratio. The people feel i that it is dishonest in regulating i the ratio to take the standard val uc of gold and the commercial val ue of sill CT as the basis of the ratio.
 tell you, MT. Editor, the peo- pie cannot be deceived by such sophistry. They demand fair dealing and fair play. They are tired of this double dealing.
 Of this we have another exam