The National tribune., 1896-07-23
FREE SILVER MANIFESTO.

Il
Lee Mantle, and by Messrs. Hartman
Wilson, Shafroth and Stevenson. 1t /:
said that Senators Pettigrew and Cannon
are also in entire sympathy with it, but
that they could not be present to sign it
The manifesto attempts TO press Free
Silver to the front as the overshadowing
issue Of the present moment but fails
lamentably to give any logical or other
reason why it should dominate all Others.
Its feebleness of presentation and
reasoning is surprise to all who have
hitherto believed in Senator Teller as a
man Of unusual ability. Of course,
nothing of particular intellectual
strength was expected from Dubois or
Lee Mantle, or the other signers, who
are merely hustling politicians, in small
communities. The keynote of the
manifesto is the following statement:
Gold recommendation means the shifting to
gold alone as the primary money OF all the
| burdens of commerce and credit formerly
borne 10y gold and silver, and as the world's
stock of these metals has always been about
equal in amount it means doubling the burden
! upon gold
This statement is not true in any OF
its parts, and, consequently, is grossly
untrue as a whole. In the first place,
gold has "borne the burden of credit
and commerce." in all the centuries since
commerce and credit have been reduced
to something Ike the modern sys-
TEN. To be more specific, this country
has virtually never been on anything
but gold basis. Though the silver
dollar appeared from time to time as
one of the units of exchange, the bust
ness of the country has always been
done on gold basis. This fact, which
is easily demonstrable, takes the corner
stone right out from the whole Free
Silver edifce. The first fact bearing on
this is that, up to 1873, there had been
only 100000 silver dollars coined
while there had been more than $780,
100000 in gold coined. That is, more
than 100 gold dollars had been coined,
for every silver dollar turned out by
our minis. This is a conclusive state
ment, and, as We said before, under
mines and oyerthrows the whole his
torical argument for silver.
For decades before the war, all bal
ances were settled in gold, banks re-
deemed their notes in gold, the Southern
planters sold their cotton for gold, the
United States paid its troops, officials
and debts for supplies in gold, and
received its revenues from customs.
taxes, and the sales of land in
gold. The silver dollar was scarcely
ever seen. There were a few Mexican
and Spanish dollars and many minor
pieces in circulation among the people,
but these almost invariably bought and
sold and paid their debts either in bank
notes, presumably redeemable in gold
or in gold coin. Every man now living,
who was old enough to be in any bust
ness before the war, will testify that he |
saw or handled 81, 900 in gold to one |
silver dollar. During and after the war
our greenbacks were measured solely in
gold. No one thought of saying how
much a greenback was worth in Silver.
1t was its gold value that interested
everybody. 1t was not until 10 years
after the war and 100 years after the
establishment of our Government that
the great cheapening of silver led the
class Of men who are always trying to
get dollar for less than a dollar to
think about substituting the silver dol
lar for the gold dollar.
Next, we shall best consider the state
ment that the stock of these metals
has always been about equal in
amount" by combining ourselves to the
statistics Of our own country. Our
figures are taken from the report of the
Director of the Mint: Prior TO 1874 we
produced scarcely any silver in this
country. The product Of gold from the
mines in Virginia, South Carolina and
Georgia was, however, quite considerable,
for the times. and ran up some years as
high as 81, 100000. In 1874 our nro-
duciion Of silver began to rise, amount
ing that wear to 10000 ounces. worth