The Mitchell capital. (Mitchell, Dakota [S.D.]) 1879-1918, 1896-09-25
given to the farmers Of the United

linen the Wilson Dill was not pro.
tective measure, so the senator says,
but he has undergone a change of
heart, for he now treats the bill as
protective measure, and this is what he
says:
"The present law, the Wilson bill, is
protective tariff measure: the aver
age rate of duty is Al. The average
rate of duty under the Mckinley law
was Al. The difference between the
two is not difference enough to divide
great political parties. On the con-
trary, both parties have admitted that
the policy of protection is the settled
policy of this country, and that the
Wilson bill as protective tariff meas
ure is conclusively demonstrated"
The senator then took up the "crime
of 1873" which he asserted demonetized
silver and struck down half of our cur
rency. He stated that he believed that
the free coinage of silver would raise
the price of silver and start up all the
factories in the country. Four years
ago under the republican administra-
ton and a protective tariff every fact
nri was running on full time. new in
dustries were being started and the
country was prosperous, yet at that
time we had no free silver.
He asserted that Thy opening the mints
that there was no fear of flooding this
country with silver, and asks where
would it come from. The silver. pro-
duction in 1895 in the United States
was 46, 6,000,000 ounces, while the worlds
production for the same pear was 1861
100000 ounces. Then Mr.. Pettigrew
asserted that by the demonstration of
silver this commodity fell in price, but
the facts show that in 1873 when silver
is alleged to have been demonetized the
United States production of silver was
only 81 ,651 900 ounces, while the worlds
production amounted to 63, 267, 900
ounces. The great increase in the
production of silver is what caused it
to decline in price, and, moreover, up
to 1873 only 100000 silver dollars had
been coined and since that time the
amount has been increased 50 times,
yet silver declined in price. Any man
who understood the situation would not
state to an intelligent audience that
100000 silver dollars coined up to 1873
kept the price up while the coinage of
fifty times that amount should keep it
down.
Mr.. Pettigrew stated that by striking
down silver in 1873 that we we're robbed
of one-half our money. The figures,
however, do not show any such condi.
tion. In 1873 we had in the United
States STA, ,000,0 and in 1895 we had
So, 2l7 900, ,000-nearly three times as
much as we had in 1878, and while ir
that year the per capita circulation was
S1S.04 in 1895 the per capita was S22.69
What great striking down of our cur
rency.
Senator Pettigrew said that the grea
increased production Of wheat is no
responsible for the low price and tina
the production each year is getting
less. Such statement is far from the
truth. In 1873 the United States hat
only Russia to compete with as whea
producing country while today Indi'
and Argentine have been added to tn
producing countries. From 1873 t.
1895 Russia placed 100000 bnshel
;, of wheat on the markets of the world
,, while India contributed 21,704, 90
: bushels and Argentine 44,Ss5,OO0 Th
absurdity of the idea that silver price
. has anything to do with the prices Q
wheat is shown ny the we'll know
fact that these two commodities ris
and fall independent of each other
= : In 1861 wheat was down to IS cents ye
q a silver dollar was worth more than
# gold dollar. In 1882 wheat was wort
r ST 40 and silver dollar was worth bu
y IS cents in gold. Such proposition
= made by the senator only show wher
# he is wrong and if he knowingly mis-
8 quotes one statement, what dependenc
!. can be placed in any statement h
e makes.
Q The senator abused the republica
n party in very ungentlemanly manner
. charging them with being robbers
h thieves, ETC., and yet at the same tim
% the senator was party to all Of thi
;; alleged robbery. 1t would be bette
y for the senator to leave such rot out {
- his speeches.
If Mr.. Pettigrew invited anybody
q ask questions and some pointed querie
- were put to him to which he replie
N not by showing that his statement WE
l. true, but by relying on his sympathi
r ers to applaud his bare statements.
le The closing peroration of Mr.. Pett
"a "a grew assumed the large proportion {
~ populistic bluster by overdrawing th
,r picture of despair, and misery al
n seemed to satisfy the populistic tender
x cies of the audience, which, howeve
N was composed of fully one-half republ
le cans.