Warren sheaf. [volume] (Warren, Marshall County, Minn.) 1880-current, 1896-08-20
BRYAN's SPEECH OF ACCEPTANCE

| ou0 SILVER 4ues UlO1l, WAS an enuSlOn OF
rhetoric in which one looks in vain
Tor solid facts. His assersions are
based upon mere theory, vague and
uncertain, and upon false premises he
hastens to arrive at wrong concla-
slons. His plea for bimetalism is but
an attempt to mislead and throw
dust in the eyes of the American peo-
pie, for what right has he to plead
the cause of bimetallism when advo-
eating a policy which surely will lead
to silver monometallism. His whole
contention he rests upon the theory,
that the price OF silver will rise to
20 per ounce if this country will
adopt the free and unlimited coinage
OF silver. If this theory is correct,
then there can be no objection to the
free coinage Of silver at the ratio of
16 to l, and if it is wrong his whole
argument falls to the ground. But
it is well to remember that this is a
theory only, an opinion or belief of
Mr.. Bryan, the 'boy orator" OF Ne
braska, and is not supported by
historic facts and the worlds expert
ence in the past. Blaine's opinion
counts for more than Bryan's, and
he said in 1878, when the bullion in
the silver dollar was worth 90 cents,
instead of 53 cents as at present:
Assurances from empirics and scien-
fists in finance that reconciliation
of the former dollar will at once and
permanently advance it's value to
par with gold, are worth little in the
face Of opposing and controlling
facts. That remonetization
Twill have a considerable effect in ad-
vancing the value is very probably,
but not to overcome the difference
now existing-a difference resulting
from causes independent OF our con-
troll in the United States Our ex-
perience with the Sherman law dis
proves Mr.. Bryan's theory: as with
an annual purchase of 225O tons Of
silver per annum the price fell from
Sill an ounce to 7S cents an ounce
between 1890 and 1898, and the
production increased SO per cent.
II free coinage will not raise the price
OF silver to 81 20 an ounce, Mr.. Bry-
an will have to admit that it's effect
will be to shift us to a silver basis,
and instead OF the "bimetallic stand
ard' OF which he so glibly speaks, we
will have a single silver standard.
That means silver monometallism
and that is really what the silver men
are after under the cloak of 'sbimet-
allism." We do not believe that
the people of the United States will
go off on wild goose chase after a
theory, that they will take this leap
in the dark.
All through his address runs a
thread Of fat, a delusion that the
government stamp on a coin makes
it's value, and he shows the cloven
hoof in his argument against chang
ing the ratio to 80 to / to cores
pond with the commercial ratio. eff
this change = he says, "were made it
would necessitate the recoinage of
81, 900, 100000 of silver into $2,-
600, 100000. There would be an
Immediate loss of $2,OOO,OOO,O 900,
either to the people or the govern
ment." If recoinage by putting
twice as much silver into the dollar
will cause loss of half the value of
the silver money, then the value of
the dollar, whether containing 371A
grains of fine silver or twice that
amount, must be the same. The
amount of metal in the dollar, hence,
is immaterial, and we might as well
coin at lower ratio, for instance
81, IL or IL, or, better still, pro-
ceed to abolish poverty by the issue
of printed bills of paper-to close the
mints and start the printing presses.
Bryan's real reason for not wanting
to increase the metal in the dollar is
that his employers, the silver miners,
may have a temporary advantage.
This country is not going to give
Bryan and his party a chance to ex,