The Republican. [volume] (Oakland, Md.) 1877-current, 1896-09-24

Hyde and Jekyll characters do not
| combine well in Presidential candi-
date. Therefore, MIR. Bryan, the next
time you address the people on this
momentuous question just follow
along these lines and say:
1.-The gold dollar will be the ruina-
| ton of this country. What we need
is cheaper dollar. If am elected
will give you a cheaper dollar, and it
should be dollar as good, as valu-
able, of the same purchasing power
and in all respects exactly like the
gold standard dollar we have to-day
Then in order to square yourself,
you should go on and say:
But this is predicted on my un-
supported assumption that silver is
going to par with gold when free sill
yer by the United States has forced
all the world to join US in inter
national bimetallism.n
To make your position still clearer
you should add:
However, if the free coinage
scheme doesn't work and the United
States is left alone with the free silver
white elephant on its hands, of course
the silver dollar will be a 50-cent dol
lar and the finances of our country
would be ruined, with noshing left
out of the wreck but a cheap, dis
credited silver dollar 10 pay our debts
and labor with"
This, Mr.. Bryan, would place you
in logical position before the Amer
lean people. Every one will agree
with you that silver recommendation
would give US a cheap 50-cent dollar
with inflated prices-and third
position in the worlds commerce.
They will also agree with you that
genuine bimetallism means q silver
dollar at par with our present gold
dollar, measured by the present gold
standard. Now, what we want to
find out is: "What shall it be-Hyde
or Jekyll-silver recommendation or
bimetallism?'
You persist in calling it bimetallism,
but you also persist in dragging III
your cheap silver dollars, which be
longs in the category of silver mono
metallism, and you keep up the cry
against the gold standard. As be
tween silver recommendation and gold
recommendation, which do you prefer?
If you thought free silver would land
us in silver recommendation would you
SUN ne III ldNOI Oh Tree SILVER.
In your New York speech you her
aided your conviction that free sill
yer in the United States would send
silver to S1.29 an ounce lin gold in
every market of the world, and make
the Is to silver dollar equal in in
trinsic value to the gold dollar" Evi-
IDENTIFY YOU have concluded that inter
national bimetallism must follow to
make your free coinage scheme a sue
cess. Have you investigated far
enough to discover the practical diff
culties in the way of international bi-
metallism and the double standard?
Let us take a practical example:
We will say that international BIZ
metallism is on trial. Suppose Ger
many owed England or the United
States a trade balance of S20,000 600,
and the ratio of value between gold
and silver was 16 to lone ounce of
gold equal to sixteen ounces of silver
which metal could be used with the
greatest economy in paying this bal
ance? Gold or silver? Perhaps you
will answer that if gold and silver
were at par at an agreed ratio of 16 to
/ it would be as economical to pay in
one metal as the other.
Let us investigate: 500, 000,0 900 in
gold would be 967 $50 troy ounces in
silver it would be sixteen times as
much, or Il, 481, 800 ounces. The diff
ference in weight of silver over
weight of gold would be IA, 513, 775
troy ounces, equal TO 497 tons of 1900
pounds each, aviordupois weight. 1t
would therefore cost more to pay in
silver and the difference would be the
expense of handling, weighing and
shipping this 497 tons of silver. The
economy IL favor of gold was natures
gift to man, and neither Wall street,
Lombard street nor the gold bugs
had anything whatever to do with it.
The well balanced minds of the world
discovered that gold, which has large
value in small bulk and weight, is
more economical to handle than sill
yer, which has less value in large bulk
and weight. For this reason gold is,
and will continue to be, preferred to
silver
When the farmer discovered that
he could economic in freight rates by
pressing his hay into bales, that by
SO doing he got greater value into
smaller bulk, he adopted that econ
Omy.
Actuated by the same instinct, the
same motive and same reason, the
commerce of the world preferred and
the enlightened nations of the earth
adopted, as the single standard Of
value, that metal which nature has
pressed into small bulk. You may
see that this advantage with which
the Creator has endowed gold is one
of great pOtentiality and even an in
ternatiOnal bimetallic ratio is power
less to overcome it in the interest Of
the silver producers. This difference
in the expense of handling gold and
silver will always make gold the most
economical, and this economy in favor
of gold will always destroy the parity
between gold and silver, no matter
what ratio might be agreed upon be-
tween nations.
In view of this fact, how could the
parity of sterling exchange between
gold and silver be maintained, and,
unless it is maintained, how could
gold and silver ever become equiva-
Tents in a double standard, at any
ratio?
Perhaps you can never appreciate
what was meant by the French None
tary Commission in saying that 1.-The
double standard is abandoned be-
cause it is impracticable and full of