The Louisiana populist., 1896-11-20
NO. IA.
NOT AN EXPERIMENT.
Free silver Coinage Would BE Only
Return to First Principiss.
From Denver Times, Silver RepubA


Return to First Prinoipiss.
From Denver Times, Silver Repubh-
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 a 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 30 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 a 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. It
is probable that an international agree
ment for the establishment OF 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
its 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 the
willingness OF the parties to them to
maintain them. 1t is the law Of ma
tions that any nation may withdraw
from any treaty to which it is a party,
ciously upon its interests.
A change In our financial system.
however radical 1t might be, would not
prevent other countries from trading
with us. The United States could not
build wall high enough to prevent
John Bull from climbing over 1t to sell
us his goods. under whatever financial
system we choose to adopt. II any for
eign nation felt disposed to stop trad
ing with US because her people disliked
our 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 10 not
international money. A little expert
menting by the United States would
not 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 none
metallists have insisted that trade
would soon be better and times would
improve-just hold on little longer
and all would be well.
The American people have had
enough Of the prosperity" of the gold
standard system,j and propose to re-
turn to the financial system of pros
porous times, and in doing % the coun-
try will be able to withstand the shock
Of the alleged experiment.
p. S.-The single gold standard IL an
experiment and the empty pocketboolKs
Of the people tell how costly 1t has
proved.