The Indianapolis journal. [volume] (Indianapolis [Ind.]) 1867-1904, 1896-08-29

Mr.. Bryan answered. why. because no
man has presented . more forcibie argn-
ment I'm favor OF bimetallism than Mr..
Carlisle has. Great applause and cheer
ing.) Let me read row what he says or
that bill: But IL will certainly offer some
relief. IL viii reverse the grinding process
that has been going on for the last few
years
CARLISLE'S WORDS TWISTED.
AYE. away back eighteen years ago he
spoke OF this as the grinding process. and.
my friends, IL does not tighten the effects
OF the grinding process TO call II a tenn
porary embarrassment. ~(Applause) He
said: Instead OF constant and relentless
contraction. instead OF constant apprecia-
ton OF money and depreciation of property
that is what we have seen. a constant
appreciation Of money and depreciation Of
rropes<y-he said. instead OF these we will
have expansion to the extent OF doubtless
G ncs per month and under its inn1,
MI. carlisle knew. In 1873 he said, 'un-
Ger Its influence. the exchangeable value
and the commodities, including labor. will
soon begin 10 rise hat Is what he said in
HaS But what will be the effect OF II?
mus inviting investments. infusing life
Quickening the pulsations Of trade in all
or its departments. He understood the
laws OF finance. He understood what was
the effect of adding this money to the cir
culation. and. my friends. III he stated the
truth then. that truth has not changed
since then, nor can IL be changed though
every one who spoke for IL should turn his
back upon IL. (Applause.) Truth lives. IL
is the one thing that will not die. i quote
these words TO you 10 show you that by
the increase or the volume OF money we ex-
pect to stop the constant appreciation OF
money and the constant depreciation OF
property.
of money and the owner or producer OF
property. Let me illustrate. Suppose a
man in this community. a young man.
trust her future TO his strong right arm,
and they start out TO build a home. Not
having enough money. they take what they
paying $1,000 down and giving a mortgage
for the other $1,000. And what is the re-
suit? Suppose money rises I'm value Sup
pose you take a notion you want a good
dollar. a high-priced dollar. a dollar that
keeps getting higher-priced each day-sup>
pose that you have a dollar that gets 10 be
the mortgage. II means that each
dollar Will buy twice as much. II means
that 1t will take twice as much of the prod
pay his debts as IL did before. What is the
result ? Why. the result Is that while IL
requires twice as much Of the products OF
the farm 10 pay the interest and twice as
much TO pay the taxes and twice as much
to pay the debt. the man finds out that
he Is not able TO pay that debt - he agreed
TO do. What then? You say, extend the
mortgage. Why, they tell him that the
land has gone down in value Tow and that
the farm is not worth enough 10 be good
security for the LOCO. Then what? There
is one thing-he can turn the farm over to
the nan who holds the mortgage. That he
can always do. What Is the result? He
vested I'm the farm. They have lost the
labor they have put forth in trying TO pay
the mortgage. and then they lose the farm
and start out i'm life again. How about the
other man who sold him the farm and got
the $1,000 down? III he loaned that $1,000 hs
got security for his $1,000. and he has the
sl.000 within his reach and then gets his
farm back.
ARoUSING PREJUDICE.
Il ask if there IS any difference between
the holder of the capital and the owner or
property in the appreciation of the dollar.
The mar with the money is twice as well
off as he was before, and the man who tried
TO own property loses all he has and had 10
begin with. You find the man who holds
the notes meeting in convention and de-
ciaring that the gold standard is the best
system of money that was ever invented.
But will those people who have lost their
home-win they meet together and indorse
the system that is DESTROYING them? My
friends. this is a practical question that
conironts the farmers of the United States.
and not of tn United States alone. but the
farmers Of Ireland. the farmers OF England
and the farmers OF Germany and the farm
"a VI tftl- III IN NAtt 80 tA1N Aa.o
the gold standard to-day. i assert that the
gold tandard could not live for one day in
any nation under the sun without the aid
of the money owners and the money chang
ers TO keep IL In existence. 1 assert that
the gold standard has never received the
Endorsement Of any class OF people except
those who prosper as society Is destroyed
by a rising dollar.
Now, 1 want to say to you that my de-
nunciation of the gold standard is sustained
by events which you can see. Let me give
you a proof. If a man tells you the gold
standard is a good thing you ask him why
il is that no party in the history or the
United States has ever declared for a gold
standard in its platform. Isn't IL strange
ii the gold standard is a good thing that no
party has ever seen hit TO say so In a plat
form? And that is true. 1t Is true that no
national party has ever indorsed a gold
s tYod w and S ye5. there tSss bnye p pse seur wse
to write the platform and risk an. issue be-
fore the people? Blu no: they do not do
f fnr5; w uaeSS s so 80 that "a. the Rep SfGps party
pledges itself to secure bimetallism. which,
of course, is a remuneration OF the gold
standard. (Applause.) II the gold STANDARD
Is good why should we try to get rid OF IL?
tApplause.) If the gold standard Is good
why did not the Republican party pledge
itself to help keep a gold standard But
no. IL pledged itself to get rid of the gold
standard just as soon as other nations Will
help. (Applause.) That is not my language.
my friends, that is the language of the
Republican Platform. and that Is the con-
struction placed upon IL by the candidate
VINO runs upon Il IN MS ielttT OF accept
an.e. He says in his letter that the Amer
lean people annot enter upon bimetailism
without the concurrent action OF other ma
tionS. Why? Does he say we shall MAIN
tain a gold standard for one year, No
For four years? No. but the conclusion is
that We must maintain IL forever IL other
nations say we must. NApplause.l
1T is not a question Of politics. my
friends. Whole parties are divided on this
issue. II rises above the question of poll
tics. They have declared against the right
of the people OF the United States 10 gov
while we want TO get rid of the gold stand
ard. we must keep tho thing which we DO
not want until aliens shall bring us relief
which we should achieve for ourselves
(Appiause.) l know not what view you
may take OF il. my friends, but IN my
the only people who have any right TO say
what the American people shall nave Tor
legislation. They ave driven down
the price of your products. They have IN
creased the burden OF your debts. They
have forec1csed your mortgages. Tney are
civilization by driving people who want 10
work out upon the streets. and then idlencss
breeds crime and crime menaces the safe
~ of every citizen of the land tApplause.)
A Voice-How about free trade?
QUESTION EvADED.
Mr.. Bryan replied: MY friends. IL is
not more taxes that the people want. hut
more money TO pay taxes with. Great APP
plause.) If there * any farmer here who
has not taxes enough I beg him 10 go 10
his county treasurer and get enough more
to satisfy his conscience and not try to
tax all the rest of the public. fApplause.)
But / care not how men may diGer upon