The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1896-10-22

lCtI
The first is this: The Democrats
have not promised anything better
than that wages would advance in
proportion to the advance in the
price of commodities of life. Does
such advance materially better the
condition of us wage earners? Sup
pose a wOrkingman is able to save say
$50 each Month under the present
gold standard; under the silver stan
dard if his wages have proportionately
advanced we will assume he could
save $40 each month. Will his $40 in
50-cent dollars buy more of the neces-
saries of life if the price of such is
doubled, than his $40 would buy in
100-cent dollars under the present gold
standard, with prices of commodities
as they are at this time? BY the
above it is conceded by way of illus
tration, that the wages of the laboring
man would Immediately advance in
proportion to the increase in cost of
things he might have to buy. But is
it not a fact that experience has dem
Onstrated time after time that the
salary paid to the laborer is the very
last to advance. Who but the laborer
will suffer during the interval between
the election of Bryan and the time
wages shall have been forced H6e
Why should the workingman vote
into power party that does not
promise in any way to promote their
welfare more than to give them what
they are now getting, and only prom
Use that much if by strikes and riots
capital can be inundated into max
ing the desired concessions?
Why do the laboring people allow
the free coinage element to delude
them, when such people are proving
to-day that they have lied and do not
believe their own words and are posi-
lively proving it by the gold clause in
all paper promising payment. 1t
SNNiilp w ilN IL a. JtlSOIl SOtS Oll W
advocate free silver coinage at ratio
of Is to 1 from the public platform
and will not draw a mortgage without
a promise to pay in gold, he either
does not believe the problem he dem
Onstrates or thinks | am fool Ar
thur Sewall does this; Stewart, of
Nevada, does it; they all do it, and if
am deceived thereby | surely am not
wise.
Who but the owners of silver bullion
can derive any honest (?) benefit from
such legislation? If citizen of Gar
rett county owned a chunk of silver
bullion as large as a railway steam
engine and would have it coined into
dollars and handed back to him with
out cost to himself, is he going to do
the generous, and because it is coined
into 50-cent dollars will he divide with
some less fortunate citizen? We fiat
ter our judgment in thinking he
would keep it himself, and if he par
ted with any of it he would receive its
equivalent in labor or in necessity
of some sort.
Is it not true that the Democrats
advance the theory that under free
coinage farm products will increase?
If the coinage of silver will materially
increase the price of farm products as
they say, why don't the price of corn,
wheat or any other product of the
farm come to their relief and prove
their assertion. We have coined
between seven and eight times the
amount of silver since the demoneti-
cation" of silver in 1878 than was
coined in the entire coinage history
of the United States up to that time.
If corn was worth fifty cents per
bushel in 1878, according to the Popo-
cratic doctrine, it should be firm at
seven and one-half times fifty cents,
or 1915 per bushel in 1896.
A silver friend asks why the silver
of the United States is not given the
same privilege of coinage that is given
the gold from the mines of South At
RIGA. | told him that no political
party is asking any such favor of the
United States government, but that
all persons who favor and vote for
free and unlimited coinage at ratio
of Is to 1, are asking twice this privi-
lege for the silver of the world, (as a
ratio of Is to just about doubles it's
value in gold.) Was this answer cor
rect?
Is it not a fact that the price of
gold, or silver either, is governed by
supply and demand, just the same as
corn, oats, pig iron or anything mar
ketable? And if this is correct, is it
not also true that the United States
government has about as much silver
for monetary purposes, already pur-
chased, .as it can conveniently take
care of? If not, why was one of the
duties of special session of Congress
to repeal certain legislative measure