The Union times. [volume] (Union, S.C.) 1894-1918, 1896-08-21
THE PARAMOUNT ISsUE-FINANCE.

Now let me ask you to consider
the paramount question of this cam
paign-the money question. 1t is
scarcely necessary to defend tho prin-
ciple of bimetallism. no national party
during the entire history of the Uni
ted States has ever declared against it,
and no party in this campaign has hud
the temcrity to oppose it. Three par
tics--the Democratic, Populist and
Silver parties-hnvc not only declared
for bI-metallism, but have outlined
the specific Legislation necessary to re-
store silver to its ancient position by
tho side of gold. The Republican
platform expressly declares that bi-
metallism is desirable when it pledges
tho Republican party to aid in sccur-
ing it as soon as tho assistance of GER
tain foreign nations can he obtained.
Those who represented the minority
sentiment in the Chicago convention
opposed the free coinage of silver by
tho United States in independent ac
tion on the ground, in their Judgment.
that it "would returd or entirely pre-
vent the establishment of international
bimetallsm. to which tho efforts of the
government should bo steadily di-
rected."
''When they asserted that effort
should be steadily directed toward the
establishment Of international bi-met-
allism, they condemned mono-metml-
lism. The gold standard has been
! weighed IN the balance and found
wanting. Take from it the powerful
support of the money owning and tho
money changing class and it cannot
stand for one day in any nation III tho
world, 1t was fastened upon the
United States without discussion be-
fore tho people, and its friends have
never yet been willing to risk YER
dict before the voters upon the issue.
"There can DC no sympathy or no
cooperation between the advocates of
universal gold standard and the nd.
vocates of bi-metallism. Between BIZ
metallism - whether independent or
international-and the gold standard
there Is an impossible gulf. Is this
ouadrennial agitation for bi-metallism
conducted in good faith, or do our op-
ponents really desire to maintain the
gold standard permanently? Are
they willing to confess the superiority
of IL double standard when joined in
by tie leading nations of the world, or
do they still insist that gold is tho only
metal suitable for standard money
among civilized nntiont? If they are
in fact desirous Of securing bi-metal-
lism we may expect them to point out
the evils of gold standard an defend
bi-metallism as system. If on the
other hand they are bending their
energies toward the permanent estnb.
ishment of II gold Standard under
cover of declaration in favor of in
ternhtional bi-metallism | am justi-
fed in suggesting that honest money
cannot be expected Mt the hands Of
those who deal dishonesty with the
American people. What is tho test of
honesty in money? 1t must plniuly be
found in the purcha ing power of tho
dollar. An absolutely honest dollar
would not vary in it general rnrchas-
ing power, 1t would lie absolutely
stable when measured hy average
prices \ dollar which increases il.
purchasing power is Just as dishonest
as dollar which decreases in pnrchaS-
ing power.
at cannot be successfully claimed
that mono metallism Or bi-mctGllsm,
or any other system gives an absolute
ly Just standard OF n.luc. Under both
iA'''o i'e''''''.''n a." n ','
.r - ';,t' i,
ness " 'n' "oi'"'' III er'' ~ WIN " a..
'onuei i""''''o'' az W"
MINIS " us ~ its''i''e' oo' ,' n
ing 'hc ''.i po|.'
10 DC uttcr!hlhe" -; the h"!hoci vi