The herald., 1896-09-04
American people in the present emer-

SeuCy.
Here the uproar became deafening and
Mr.. Bryan again sat down while Mr..
Snively pleaded with those who were
shouting and crowding for positions to
keep quiet.
When Mr.. Bryan resumed he said he
was not very hopeful for bringing the
advocacy Of bimetallism to those who
may be peculiarly benefited by rise in
the value of the dollar, but he believed
there were some who took 1t for granted
that the gold standard was good for
them and who did so under mistaken
ideas.
It was to these that he desired more
particularly to talk He added: Now,
the first question to be considered Is,
what is an honest dollar? We hear peo-
pie talking about honest money. What
do they mean by honest money? Did
you ever hear an advocate Of the gold
standard give the definition of an hon.
est dollar? will tell you the definition
which you generally hear 1t is this:
That an honest dollar is dollar which
when 1t Is melted loses none Of its value.
That Is what they tell you is an honest
dollar. want to say to you, my friends,
that the man who gives to you that def
milton of an honest dollar has yet to
learn the first principle Of monetary sci
ence. (Great applause.) An honest dol
lar is the dollar which retains the same
general purchasing power yesterday. to-
day and forever. (Applause.)
That would be an honest dollar. Pur-
chasing power is the test of honesty. A
dollar which rises in purchasing power
is just as honest as dollar which falls
in purchasing power. (Great applause.)
The only difference is that when the dol
lar rises 1t helps one class of citizens.
When 1t falls it helps another class of
people; and when you find person who
is always afraid that dollar will fall in
it's purchasing power ~ have found
man who, being interested in having dol
lars grow larger is of course in favor Of
a gold standard. When you find men who
tell you that they want dollar of the
highest purchasing power, you may set
it down that you have person who be-
lieves in legislating for the power-own-
ing classes who profit by rising dollars.
But the definition which have given to
you-the definition given by the average
advocate Of the gold standard-that the
honest dollar is the dollar which, when
melted, loses none of it's value, ] ~ that
definition overlooks one important thing
in the dollar. Let me illustrate: Sup
pose all the world should join in gold
standard and make our dollar the unit
under the silver standard and the next
day the nations of the world should get
together and decide that there was too
much money in the world and decide to
gather up ninety-nine hundredths of all
the dollars in the world and sink them
in the ocean. What would be the result?
You have one dollar where you now have
one hundred dollars, and according to
the definition Of the gold standard men
you would still have honest dollars, be-
cause If you melted one of them it would
not lose anything Of its value. Gap
| plause.) If, however, you owe man a
| thousand dollars and you have to go out
and sell property in order to get thous-
| and dollars to pay your debts, you have
to sell about one hundred times as much
property to get the money to pay your
debts. Would they be able to convince
you that was an honest dollar? Take the
other side. Suppose that after the ma
tions had agreed upon the gold standard
that somebody had found enough gold
to coin into one hundred times as much
money as we have today. Where we have
a dollar we would then have hundred
dollars. It would be honest money, ac-
cording to the definition of the advocates
of the gold standard.
"But suppose you owe man $1,000 and
pay him $1,000, when there are 100 times
as many dollars, the dollars you pay to
him would not buy as much property
as they did before. Would you be able
to convince him that you had paid your
debt in honest dollars? Oh, no; he
would have a different idea of honest
money than he has given you"
Referring again to the claim that gold
is honest money" because nothing is
lost in melting or remelting the coin.
Mr.. Bryan asserted that this was due
to the fact that the government ad-
mitted gold to free coinage at its mints.
This characteristic of gold, he argued,
was given to it by law, and yet the gold
advocates did not recognize the fact.
Were the same law to be applied to sill
yer, like gold, to be admitted to the free
coinage at the mints, the value of the
white coin would suffer no more by the
melting process than does gold.
Mr.. Bryan insisted that it was dis
crimination in favor of the money of
the rich man.
Next Mr.. Bryan ridiculed the claim
that has been put forth, that If all the
gold were to be driven out of circulation
by the free coinage Of silver, fifteen
years would be required to coin enough
silver to take its place. Mr.. Bryan Won
dered how long the American people
would be in erecting more mints should
they be needed. He added:
"But there is another proposition, or
a part of that proposition: A man who
made this statement wound up by sag
ing that during these fifteen years mon
ey would be so scarce that silver dol
lar would be harder to get, and a higher
priced dollar, measured by rSoperty,
than a gold dollar is now. That is the
worst of all absurdities. Just think of
it. Why, you know that If silver would
drive gold out, it would be because sill
yer is cheaper than gold. I say, that if
you could imagine such contingency,
If you could think for moment that
silver would be dearer than &c el, would
not gold come back to drive silver out?
(Applause.) And yet you will be told,
and seriously told, that under the free