Jamestown weekly alert. [volume] (Jamestown, Stutsman County, D.T. [N.D.]) 1882-1925, 1896-10-15

| part or in the history of any
party in this country, proposes to
surrender the right to determine
our financial policy and place leg
islative control over it in the
hands of foreign nations, rather
than in the hands of the American
people. If the republican plat
form had declared that the gold
standard was a desirable thing,
then republicans might vote for it
and present the merits Of the gold
standard; they might say, as the
advocates of the gold standard
said before the St. Louis conven-
tion, that gold was the money Of
civilization; that free coinage was
in the interest Of the mine owner
and that the demagogue was ap-
pealing to the selfish interest Of
the people who wanted to pay
their debts in cheap dollars. I say
if the republicans had declared for
gold they might have used the
argument which the advocates Of
the gold standard usually use, but
the republican platform does not
declare that gold is desirable
standard. The republican platform
pledges the republican party to
get rid of the gold standard and to
substitute the double standard just
as soon as other people or nations
will let them. Violent applause.
We insist that if the gold standard
is good thing we ought to main
tain it, not temporarily, but per-
manently; if the gold standard is
desirable the American people
ought to be allowed to have it, not
for one year or four years, but for
ever, and if the gold standard is SO
bad that We ought to ask other
nations to help us to get rid of it,
then it is 80 bad that we ought to
get rid of it whether other nations
will help US or not. My friends I
submit these two questions which
I have repeated time and time
again that if the gold standard is a
good thing, then we ought to have
it, but if It is a bad thing, as the
republican platform expressly
declares, promising to substitute
something better for it, then my
friends, we ought to abolish it at
once whether other nations like it
or not. (Applause.)
Another thing, l want you to
remember that we who advocate
free coinage at 16 to l, are the
only people who have a financial
system that they are willing to
present before the American peo-
pie. Our opponents propose moth
ing, they oppose everything. We
say we want free coinage of silver
as we have Of gold, unlimited coin
age of silver as we have unlimited
coinage Of gold, at the ratio which
now exists between our gold and
silver and that Independent Of
the action of any foreign nation.
What do our opponents say. Do
they elaborate system? Not at
all. They simply oppose our plans.
Do they know what is good for the
American people? If SO why don't
they tell you? Will you say that
their refusal is due to ignorance OF
lack Of confidence in you?
My friends, ought you to have
confidence in those who have no
confidence in you. Hurrah for
Bryan! Great applause. We not
only know what we want but we
know why we want it, and we know
how we are going to get it. We
want bimetallism and when we say
bimetallism we tell you we mean
bimetallism. We do not mean
that the government will buy what
ever metal it needs-that is not
what we mean by bimetsllism.
When we talk of bimetallism we
mean two metalism; we mean the
use Of no one metal only but of
two metals as equal standard
money metal, metals entering the
mints on equal terms, and going
from the mints with equal legal
tender qualities. That is what we
mean by bimetallism, two metals
linked together at fixed ratio and
given equal privileges and equal
rights. My friends, that is BIZ
metallism. [Great applause.