The Caldwell tribune. [volume] (Caldwell, Idaho Territory [Idaho]) 1883-1928, 1896-07-25
THE SILVER MEN AND MCKINLEY.

The address of Senator Teller and
his associates who left the Republican
national convention on the silver issue
is not only an able document, but an
interesting one. 1t may be regarded
as the very best presentation of the ar
Ruments of the extreme free-silver
men that can be made. 1t bears evil
dence of sincerity, and there is in it no
conscious misrepresentation of Senator
Tellers opponents in the Republican
party, 1t is interesting mainly because
of the concession made, which neces-
sariIy modify the contention of those
who signed the address.
It is admitted in the address that
Major Mckinley is not a single.stand.
ard gold man and that his course in the
past has been that of consistent friend
Illness toward silver. The objection to
him is not based on his record, but on
tine fact that he accepted the financial
plank of the st. Louis platform. His
honesty, his devotion to Republican
principles, even his friendliness to sill,
yer, are not questioned; but the posi-
ton Of the seceders is based on the fact
that he accepts the declaration in favor
of maintaining the existing gold stand
ard until a double standard can be Sc.
cured by international agreement.
The address admits that there is even
TO this Objectionable plank veneering
of bimetallism; but, as it declares in
favor of the existing standard, and as
Major Mckinley accepts the platform
of his party, the signers of the address
will support Mr.. Bryan, and not Major
Mckinley.
A careful reading of the address will
show that there is not so much differ
ence between the silver men who are
supporting Mckinley and those silver
men who say they are going to support
Bryan. Under the leadership of men
like Senator Tellar the coinage laws of
the United States have been very much
modified in the interest of silver.
There is engrafted on them not thin
veneertng of bimeta llism, but a posi-,
tive, well-deHned bimetallic policy.
The law of 1853 made silver a legal
tender to the amount of So; the law of
1873 repeated this limitation, and made
the gold dollar the unit of value; the
law of 1878 made the silver dollar the
equal of the gold dollar and legal ten
der; the laws of 1890 and 1893 pledged
the government to the maintenance of
the parity between the gold and the
silver coins and to the bimetallic pol
icy. The st, Louis platform was not |
all that the bimetallists wanted, but it
did not violate the policy enunciated
in the laws of 1890 and 1893. There.
FORE it was accepted.
The main point of difference between |
the silver men who support Mckinley
and those silver men who say they will |
support Bryan is as to the necessity for
agreement as pelimi-
nary to free coinage. The silver men
who support Mckinley admit that the
independent action of the United
States in adopting free coinage would
not secure the results they hope for.
Therefore, they favor an earnest effort
TO secure action in favor of bimetallism,
Of the double standard, by international
agreement. Senator Teller and his
friends admit that this would be better
than independent action, and that in
agreement should be Sc
cured. They argue that the consent Of
to such an agreement cannot
be obtained; therefore the United States
ought to take the risk Of independent
action, in the hope that all the other
nations, except England, would come
TO her assistance. In other words,
they base their hope, their ultimate
nope, of success on international agree
nent independent of England. They
admit that, to make free coinage the
Iuccess that they desire, there must be
in measure, at least-international
action. They have not made so great a
departure from their friends in the Re-
publican party as would seem at a first
,lapce.
Those who favor protective tariff
lain that, vita the adoption of
he Mckinley act, in 1890, the prices