The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-08-20

We give place today to a communica-
ton that is beyond the ordinary limit
OF length, because we wish to give
every latitude to criticism upon our
own position, and because, also. this
gentleman furnishes so conspicuous
an illustration of a bad fault in any
discussion, the habit of producing part
of a record without giving the whole.
His contention is that the men who
favored the Bland-Allison act of 1878
did not believe that its effect would be
to raise the price of silver bullion. He
says that the Bland-Allison act, that
was patched up in the senate, was
ga thing that no silver man ever pre-
dicted would raise the price of silver
to parity with gold Fortifying this
position, he quotes from the Congress
sonal Record, not the Congressional
Globe, beginning, for reasons best
known to- himself, at page 1851.
The debate in the house on the bill,
as it came from the senate, is recorded
at length in the volume of the Con-
but the account of it begins on page
1243. Referring to the earlier portions Of
the debate, and be it remembered that
it Is not in any case here the original
free silver bill that is under discussion.
but the bill as amended by the senate,
and, as discussed by Mr.. Turner's let
ter, we find that Mr.. Phillips, of Kan
sas. speaking for the bill, said that,
while he believed the amendments
would Cripple it's usefulness and
weaken its power to relieve the coun-
try" still he should vote for it. That
fixes his status. Here is what he said:
I venture the prediction. and my predic-
ton is based on figures and calculations, that
before twenty months from the time the sill
dollar is coined, gold and silver in the
proportions OF our currency, will be at par
with each other and before three years have
passed it will have risen to be the dearest
metal. page 1244)
Following him came Mr. Monroe, of
Ohio, and used the following language:
We thus reach the conclusion that the sill
dollar. remonetized at the ratio of Is to l,
or 412l2 grains of standard silver to tho dol
lar. would soon rise in value to par with
gold. 1t will not be difficult to reduce the
amount whenever the advanced price of silver
shall demand 1t. page 1246)
The debate was continued by Mr..
Bundy, of New York, from whose
speech we take the following extract:
l am firm In the belief that silver should
be utilized for other purposes than the arts,
and a commodity with merely nominal
value. and that the restoring its usefulness as
money will go far toward restoring its former
value. the - and superior of gold. And
while ] cannot now, from lack of time, go
Into The discussion of that topic. I am con-
v1nced that but short time will be needed
20 remove all possible inferority of silver
as a legal tender coin. page 1249.)
This brings us down to the point at
which Mr. Turner begins his excerpts.
We propose to add little to them In
quoting Mr.. Bland, he judiciously
omits to notice that Mr.. Bland con-
tinued his opinions in the following
terms:
Meanwhile let us take what we have to
supplement it Immediately in the appropria-
tons bills and il We cannot do that, l am in
favor of issuing paper money enough to stuff
down the bondholders until they are sick.
Mr.. Sayler, of Ohio, answering the
objection that the bill did not provide
for free coinage, said that it was prac-
tically the same thing, since it author
lied coinage to the full capacity of the
mints Of the United States We are
astonished that our correspondent
should make a quotation from Mr..
Southland and stop at the precise point
where 1t becomes interesting. Let us
follow Mr.. Southard's argument, found
on page 1851, to this effect:
The meritorious principle recognized in this
bill. and even as amended by the senate is
that both coins shall be equal as a unit of
value in legal tender quality 1t recognizes
the old silver dollar of 4121s grains of stand
ard silver and makes 1t legal tender for all
debts, public and private and the argument
is perfectly irresistible for the rest in the
future. 1t will cut its own way with but lit
tie help.
There was, even in that year of our
Lord 1878, great man named Hanna:
but his first name was not Mark. and
he hailed from Indiana, instead of
Ohio. Here is choice sentence from
his long address, which shows us his
general attitude and his particular be-