The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-10-31

A
tte said so in two or three annual messages
during his first term President. and yet
county voted for MI Cleveland and so
voted for the policy # stopping even the
coinage of two WILTON dollars month. The
, Republican party did not favor the PROPOSE
ton to stop this coinage of two million
! dollars of silver a month, and denounced
in their campaign of that year the PROPOSE
! ton to stop this coinage. They said they
were in favor of bimetallism in that cam
paign. That does not involve the free and
| independent coinage of silver at the ratio of
l6 to l.; it does not involve the idea of a
double standard in the sense in which ii
is now used by many in debate We said
we are opposed TO stopping the coinage of
TWO million dollars month and every
Democrat in Hancock county probably
voted for the Democratic candidate who
/ was in favor of stopping it. Not only SO,
| but when you came to the campaign of 1892
you did not then declare for the free and
unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio
| of Is to /. You declared for free coinage
| but you said-and you made it emphatic in
| your resolution that Subject-that the
| parity of our coin. the equality of our dol
| lars. paper and coin, must be preserved.
And in that platform you suggested three
| its relation to gold The first of these was
| an international agreement.
COMPLETE CHANGE OF FRONT
I'm 1892 you suggested in your own plat
| form the very thing that Mr.. Bryan is now
| denouncing all over this country as unpa-
triotic. namely, that the cooperation of
! foreign governments should be asked in
order to maintain the parity of gold and
| silver coin. So that four years ago every
| Democrat in Hancock county voted that if
| we had free coinage of silver we should
| seek an international agreement in order
to maintain the parity of silver coins and
gold coins. 1 ask that you bear in mind,
| while you read the denunciations of Mr..
| Bryan and others of W hat they call an un-
| American policy. that in 1892 your own
| party suggested that very thing Not only
! so. but you said that if that could not be
| attained, then there was another sugges-
| tion, namely that by our own legislation
! we must in some way hold up silver so
| that its equality with gold should be main
Nov, what is your position to-day?
You reject the idea 9f lsse I{ipg any aid
3s aafss sSa 5aa' tasHs s tEsa5iS9 vaISe
Shall be no internatioi ssin tina that
| there shall be no legitaation tending to
maintain ma the parity OF Of silver coin, but that
! expense to the owner every ounce of silver
| bullion that is brought to the mint and
shall stamp it is full dollar, and turn it
| back to the owner of the bullion and let it
| take care of itself. The idea of government
support was rejected in the Chicago plat
| form. 1t was distinctly rejected by Mr.
| Bryan in his speech in the convention when
| Senator Hill, Of New York, suggested that
| idea.
To-day you stand rejecting the sugges-
| tion that the parity of these metals must
be maintained; edr and yet you made the cam
| platform. Not only so. but in that plat
form you declared that the maintenance
| of the parity of these two coins was es-
sential and that debased coin. or one that
was not worth one hundred cents on the
dollar. was destructive to the prosperity of
the country and that it was especially de-
structive 10 the interest of the farmers and
the workingmen of the country. Go get
your platform and read it over and see if
the declarations are not there as / have
described the n. We are to-day asserting
the parity of our coins must be preserved;
that If they are not preserved they will in
pecially injure the farmer and the work
ingman of the country Four years ago
that was official Democratic doctrine.
Now my friends, the Republican party
to-day IS making no attack upon silver.
We are using II and how are we using it?
legal-tender silver dollars in circulation; M
ard they are passing in parity with gold.
How and why? Because have put it in
the law written in tie law n pledge on the
part of the government that we would
maintain the parity, of those coins, and we
the suggestions that was contained in the
Democl attic platform four years ago name
St ~, that tto we IS should by some congressional
OF these coins. We have this large vol
ume of silver in circulation; and we have
six hundred millions of gold in circulation
and they circulate an equality with
each other, and the people in their business
We desire to maintain just as large a cir
cuta9ion taindd ,6 OF silver as can be main
that we use-2that is our proposition. ZAP ZAP,
plause.) The proposition of the Democratic
party is to go back on the platform of 1892
and say we will have no international
gG We will ATTEMPT to preserve-
pla torn that l neglected to notice-they
fald the parity must be preserved either by
making the intrinsic value of a silver dollar
equal to the intrinsic value of a gold dol
lar, or by International agreement or by
congressional legislation; and they declared
themselves in effect opposed to free silver
coinage unless its parity was supported by
one of these three methods. We
ods; We have used Congress- taess me'n5 to
say that the strength and weight
TINS silver coinage, and that we will MAIN
tai tam IT'S Darity,-and the Democratic party
warts to knock that prop from under the
silver we use and to set ii afioat as an
estray to take care of itself. iAppause)
WOULD CAUSE A SEA OF TROUBLE
Now, my countrymen. I don't think
there is a man i'll this audience that be-
lieves that gold and silver will circulate for
coin at the ratio of 16 to l freely and with
out any pledge OH the part of the govern
ment. Why should it? The intrinsic value
is different. There has not been case in
the history of the world-and all sorts of
financial experiments have been tried
freely coined at twice it's value compared
with gold that the gold crcula ton did not
absolutely flee away. | think we ought to
1Lsert, when Mr.. Bryan says he thinks If
went that he should find something in the
history of mankind that would support his
Irophecy. daughter and applause) In
matter so monentous, so affecting the in
terest of all of these people he ought not
to ask you to reject all the teachings of
history and to stake these mighty issues
irVolVing the honor of the country, involv-
ing the prosperity of these people upon his
uninstructed and doubtful declaration that
he thinks it would. daughter and ap-
Dlause.)
I'VE have a choice, then between a Joint
use of the two metals, either intrjnsicaIIv
equal or supported by an lnternationaI
agreement. or by some congressional
declaration. That choice was given to us
by your platform four years ago. and [ ap-
peal to the intelligent, self-respecting
Democrats of Hancock county whether Won
are willing, upon the call of a man whose
Democracy has even been questioned upon
driven out of the party many of the first
thinkers and leading men of it. men whose
names you have been wont to cheer
whether you are going to abandon what
you said and thought and cheered for and
take up this new doctrine of the free coin
age of silver without relation to tne in
ttinsic merit of the coin, without an inter
national agreement and without any. s1n
port from Congress
No. my countrymen, it would bring us a
sea of troubles. A sea CT troubles il would
be to proclaim to the world that we felt
ourselves at liberty al any time to degrade