Montpelier examiner. [volume] (Montpelier, Idaho) 1895-1937, 1896-10-09
NOT AN EXPERIMENT.
Free liver Coinage Would De Only .

Free $ liver Coinage Would he Only n
Return to First PrIncIpies.l
(F'Eom Denver Times, Silver Republi-
CAM
One OF the argumentst advanced by
the gold standard advocates is that any
change in our monetary system would
create, in our own country a danger
Gus disturbance of values and would
completely upset our business relations
with all foreign countries.
1t might be supposed from their atti-
tude on this question that we are en-
Joying high degree of prosperity, and
that this desirable state of existence
might be endangered by the proposed
change in the monetary system. In
view of the bankruptcy, poverty, and
distress OF the people of the United
States to-day, are we not called upon
to try something, although the rem
edy we try may not be perfect? We
have tried the single gold standard for
over twenty years, and after so long
a trial we have reached business par
alysis, labor is unemployed and poverty
and want is upon every side, and we
have yet to hear of prospect of i'm
provement under a continuation of the
gold standard.
Bimetallism, however, is no expert
ment. History tells us that under this
system alone the world has been pros
porous. To return to the bimetallic
standard is no new order of things. and
to wait for an international agreement
Is to never return to bimetallism. 1t
is probable that an international agree
ment for the establishment of a ratio
between gold and silver will never be
made, even though all nations should
suddenly become bimetallists. The rea-
son for this is that each nation makes
It's own laws concerning legal tender
money and banking.
An international agreement would be
a treaty between nations and treaties
are of no other binding effect than tho
Willingness OF the parties to them to
maintain them. 1t Is the law of ma
lions that any nation may withdraw
from any treaty to which 1t is a party.
whenever that treaty operates PERM
ciously upon its interests.
A change in our financial system
however radical it might be. would not
prevent other countries from trading
with us. The United States could not
build wall high enough to proven.
John Bull from climbing over it to sell
Us MS goods, under whatever financial
system we choose to adopt If any FOR
e1gn nation felt disposed to stop trac-
ing with us because her people disliked
cur financial system, we would try and
get along without buying from them.
commerce and trade do not depend
upon the uniformity of money in the
different countries. Gold itself I, NOT
international money. A little experi-
lnonting by the United States would
net be out of place at the present time.
Under the gold standard we have been
steadily going from bad to worse, and
yet from year to year the gold mono
metallists have insisted that trade
would soon be better and times would
improve-just hold on a little longer
and all would be well.
The American people have had
enough of the prosperity" Of the gold
standard system, and propose to re-
turn to the financial system of pros
porous times, and in doing SO the coun-
try will be able to withstand the SHOCK
OF the alleged experiment
p. S.-The single gold standard is an
experiment and the empty pocketbooks
Of the people tell how costly it has
proved.