Birmingham state herald., 1896-03-15

mlDe
 The people cannot be deceived. They are studying this question as Dever before. Epithets cannot deter them from penetrat- ing to it's mystery. The 'oraze'' may have passed, but the era of sober and de- liberate investigation has begun-nay is already far adyaneed-and warn gentle men that there never has Been so much in- terest in this great question as there is now. "What is honest moneyP " men ara asking. Have we 1t now2 If not, how shall we obtain itf'' These questions must bo answered by arguments, not by adjeotives.
 Nor, sir, on the other hand, does this discussion give proper place to wild talk of revolution, secession and bloodshed. Sir, that kind of declaration has no justi- fication in this forum or in any other in the United States. This is a government of the people. It Is the highest form yet known of that kind of government which great commentator has called "a govern ment by discussion" i" and 1t is by orderly, sane, passionless though earnest discussion in the presence of the intelligent public opinion of the United States that we must settle all large questions of policy Duclos said, in reference to public opinion, "The man in power commands, but the intelli- gent govern, because in time they form public opinion, and that sooner-ar later subjugates every kind of despotism. We bow to the reign of law, and he who advo- cates any other way of settling differences is preaching anarchy and will find no sympathy in this country.
 In the discussion of this question the first line of demarcation should be plainly drawn between the advocates of the single gold standard upon the one side and tho advocates of bimetallism on the other. In this matter there is great confusion of terms. It has been noticeable in the dis oussions on this floor, it is noticeable in similar discussions everywhere among those who take part in this controversy. Men call themselves bimetallists, men have today upon this floor called them- L selves bimetallists who believe in mone- Y tary system having one metal as basis and another metal practically redeemable in it or resting upon it.
 That is not bimetallism. That, I re- peat, is not bimetallism. Nothing can be gained by false use of terms. Everybody ought to favor the removal of all uncer- tainty in the meaning of the terms em- ployed in this argument. If a man actual ly believes in the continuance of the pres ent system-and I conoede that there are two sides to the question and that a man may rationally contend for the one or the other-but if man honestly believes that gold should be the sole measure of value in the world why cannot he say so and stand boldly and bravely up to his declara- tionp have no patience with the believer in tho gold standard who exhausts all the resources of ingenuity in an attempt to avoid stating his real position. Such evasion bespeaks lack of confidence ei thcr in his own conclusions or in their &C., oeptability to>the country.
 Bimetallism Defined.
 Now, sir, man who is honestly bi- metallist, who believes in the use of both gold and silver as standard money, as money of ultimate redemption the final basis of all token and representative cur rency, cannot consistently stand up here and deny the evils of the single gold stand ard. It amazes me to hear gentlemen up- on this floor loudly proclaim themselves bimetallists and then launch themselves into tedious argument to prove that the gold standard is wholly satisfactory. They are bimetallists yet gold Is a stable meas ure of valuesl They are bimetallists, yet there is no appreciation of gold! They are bimetallists yet prices have not fallenl They are bimetallists, yet prices have fall en and entirely because of cheapened cost 
 the restoration of silver is impossiblel They are bimetallists, yet the present sys- tenn must continue indeinitelyi They are bimetallists, but the single gold standard Is good enough for theml Why, sir, this Is the very acme of inconsistency. 1 know not which is the more pitiable-that such folly should be tolerated or that so many who commit it should be so unconscious of it.
 It may be thought sir, that am spend ing too much time upon this matter. But in the forum where this discussion is soon to be taken-I mean the great tribunal of the public opinion of the United States-it is of the utmost importance to both sides that we agree upon the meaning of the terms used in the inquiry, and that men honest in their convictions shall boldly take their places under the banners they mean to follow
 MT. Maurice L. Muhleman. deputy as- sistant treasurer of the United States at New York, in his recent book, Monetary Systems of the World" page 12, says;
 By bimetallisfn, strictly defined, Is meant the free and unlimited coinage of both gold al silver into coins of full debt paying power"
 I refer to Mr. Muhleman's definition be- cause he speaks with authority upon mat ters of fact, and because his book aims not at theoretical discussion, but at clear statement of settled and existing conditions. .#z~5,
 Let mo cite another authority: The royal comm ssion appointed in 1886 by Queen Victoria Ito inquire into the causes of the recent changes in the values of the precious metals reported in 1888, and the report was published by our gov ernment in s89. quote from page 59 of that report, section 116.
 "A bimetallic system of currency, to be completely effective, must, in the view of those who advocate it, include two essen- tial features: (a) An open mint ready to coin any quantity of either gold or silver which may be brought to 1t; (b) the right on the part of debtor to discharge his liabilities, at his option, in either of the two metals at ratio fixed by law"
 That, sir, is bimetallism, and if man do not believe in 1t let him say so, but let him not believe in something else and label 1t "bimetallism" for purposes of de- oeption. The statement that the present system is bimetallic, if not ignorant, is not candid The attempt to substitute for the y,{y ofh al lliaua