People's voice. [volume] (Wellington, Sumner County, Kansas) 1890-1917, 1896-10-01

-AA' GOu5 oOdi OCu vi lISuO OuJO ny
remarki1g that it was strange that un-
der a gold standard we have so much
Silverand so little gold. We are salts
fed, he said, with our money and want
more of it. The BlandAllison act is
not free coinage. Under free coinage
the government turnedOut the coins to
individuals as legal tender; under the
Bland llisOn act the government
buys and coins the silver, retaining
the profit. This is the only way the
government has been able to keep
both gold and silver in circulation at
, the same time, one moment of prac-
tical experience is worth a month of
prophecy.
He neglected to tell the people that
the limited coinage system which he
vaunted so highly was not product
of the Republican party. The Bland
Allison act was vetoed by a Republi-
can president Hayes and passed over
his head by Democratic votes, a
majority of Republicans in both
houses voting against the measure.
Likewise with every other measure
since 1873, looking to larger use of
silver. The Sherman act of 1890 was
put up as a compromise to defeat free
coinage; John Sherman so stated. And
Republicans joined hands with Grover
Cleveland to put it out of the way in
less than three years. His party has
always fought limited coinage and
does not even offer that much
now. There have always been some
Republicans favorable to silver in
congress, but many Of them have been
driven bodily from the party by this
last flat-fOOted declaration for the
gold standard.
Long quoted from the statistical ex-
tract to show that the circulation In
1873 was only slS.0S per capita, while
in 1895 it was s22.96. He brushed
Senator Plumb's deductions for re-
serves all aside with single wave Of
the hanu.
We want to pay the old soldiers in
as good money as the bond holder,
said Long. "a voice, "you have not
done itp'l II say we have" replied
Chester. During the war there was a
little time when the government
could not, but she is doing it now.
He compared the per capita circula-
tioD Of the United States with that Of
Mexico, 1886, Japan, &.OO, and China,
81 OS, all silver countries, He, Of
course, made no explanations Of the
difference in civilizations and the need
of more money in highly civilized
countries.
He claimed that the theory Of the
volume Of money regulating the pur-
chasing power Of money would not al
ways work; that there were always
qualifying circumstances Of credit
money, etc., to interfere.
he admitted the fall in prices Of
agricultural products but denied that
it was attributable TO the gold STAN
dard. II so why did it not level them
all the same? He claimed that wheat
was lower from lS40 to 1860 than it
was from 1880 to 1890; that the fall
was also greater from IS to '73 than
since then.
He explained what he meant by
saying that our national debt was
payable in revenue, and not in pro-
ducts; the revenue should be raised
by tariff upon goods which we can
produce in this country; the foreigner
should be charged for the privilege of
entering our markets in competition
with our home manufacturers.
He illustrated with two Mexican
dollars as compared wit. the US.
dollar. What did il profit the Mexi-
can if he could get $40 for his steer in
Mexican money if they were only