The herald., 1896-10-28
SEVEN THOUSAND PEOPLE At The X|GNAM

|
| question.
Judge Earle spoke from the stand
point of a Bryan Democrat. He spoke
| for an hour, holding his audience with
out the least impatience on their part.
Two points that he made ought to be
given wide circulation. One of them
was his criticism of the interview pub
! lished in the Times, alleged to have
been made by 1. w. Hellman, president
1 of the Nevada bank of San Francisco
In that interview Mr.. Herman is al
| legged to have said: "Russai, as I have
| safd has let 1t be known, and it is an
| open secret in financial circles abroad
| that If the United States adopts free
coinage of silver she will send more than
$500, ,0e0, 900 of her silver here to exchange
| 1t for gold" "This enormous
volume of silver will come to America as
| fast as ships can bring it. and Russia
will take our gold for the purpose Of
increasing her supply, so that she may
| go upon gold basis" ?
Judge Earle, in part, said that he did
not have the pleasure of an acquaint-
| ance with Mr. Hellman, but from what
he had learned. he knew him to be a
man of good standing in the community
| and man who aspires to be a leader
of men, or he would not have suffered
himself to be interviewed on the money
| question. This very fact indicated that
he thought he might be able to influence
a vote or two for Major Mckinley. Now,
writer or speaker of the standing of
Mr.. Hellman ought to be very careful at
this late day of the campaign to state
that which was only the truth; if he does
not. some one might be led to vote under
false pretense, which is as morally
| wrong as taking his property with the
same motive Mr.. Hellman, in making
| the statement that Russia has $500, ,000,-
900 of silver to dump upon this country,
should Mr.. Bryan be elected, has been
| greatly imposed upon, has not read the
| record Alright, or he is willfully wrong.
One of these positions he must take. 1
hold in my hand circular No. 1913, issued
| by John G. Carlisle, secretary of the
| treasury, under date of July l, 1885, and
as Mr.. Carlisle at this very moment Is
making koldbug speeches in Kentucky.
and is recognized leader of that faction
known as National Democrats" it is
to be presumed that he has made the
showing just as strong for the gold
| party as he can consistent with the
| facts. What does he say about the
amount of silver in Russia? On pages
&c and 27 of this circular, under the
heading. Approximate Stocks of Money
in the Aggregate and Per Capita in the
Principal Countries of the World, he
says that all the silver tina tRussia has
is $4S, S,00O,O 900. Who is mistaken about
| this matter Mr. Carlisle or Mr.. He'll
man? One or the other, surely. I am
inclined to think that tt is Mr.. Hellman.
| Now, we have a statute law in our civil
| code which says that "a witness false in
| one part of his testimony Is to be dis
trusted in others"
| Applying this plain rule of law to Mr..
Hellman's interview, what have you to
| say about the balance Of the interview?
| Again, there Is another rule of law that
where a witness is willfully false upol
any material matter at issue, the jury
may disregard the whole of the witness
| evidence. Now, If the witness Helln1an
| in talking to the public through repu-
table newspaper, made this statement
| about there being five hundred millions
of silver in Russia, willfully knowing
| that his assertion was error then ap-
plying the rule of law just enunciated.
| Mr.. Hellman should be disbelieved not
| only in the statement made but in all
other statements made in his reported
| interview. He also says in another part
of this interview that the countries of
Europe are in prosperous condition"
This is another one of his misstate-
| ments. All well informed men who read
and keep up with the times know that
all over Europe there is great and al
most universal discomfort and unrest.
especially among agricultural masses.
| Notice what those farmers in conven-
| t1On ndQ TO say tHe OLNeT udy 10 our
| standard bearer, Mr.. Bryan, from
| Buda Pesth. Would you believe that
great convention of farmers upon their
| distressed condition, or will you believe
Mr.. Hellman. They cry aloud for the
free and unlimited coinage of silver,
and bids Bryan Godspeed in redeeming g
this country, and theirs too. Now the
truth is that Mr.. Hellman in his visit
to Europe was wined and dined by the
| money powers, and from his surround
| ings and from the conversations had
with aggregated wealth. he came to the
conclusion that all was well with Eu-
rope, while all of the laboring and pro-
ducing classes are groaning with bur-
| dens of debt. 1t is remarkable fact
that, for it is fact, that the hard times
began, and have continued to grow
harder and closer upon the masses in
all those countries just after they adopt
ed the single gold standard, and there
the double standard of money, or BIZ
metallism.
Judge Earle then took up that part
of the Democratic platform known as
the income tax plank and the criticism
of the supreme court. He said among
other things: "The Republican party
| is the last party on earth to complain at
the criticism of the supreme court on
any decision they might make. Permit
| me to read to you what Mr.. Lincoln
said about the Dred Scott decision. The
decision declared that a negro could not
sue in the United States court and that
congress could not prohibit slavery in
! the territories. 1t created violent up
roar in the north. Mr.. Douglas went at
once to Illinois to calm his constituents.
What, he cried, oppose the supreme
court! Is it not sacred? to resist it is
anarchy Mr.. Lincoln met him fairly
| on this issue at Springfield in June, 1857,
and this is what he said: We believe
| as much as Judge Douglas (perhaps
more) in obedience to and respect for
the judicial department of the govern
ment. but we think the Dred Scott de-
| cision Is erroneous We know that the
court that made 1t has often overruled
| its own decisions, and we shall do what
we can to have 1t overrule this. We offer
no resistance to it. If this important
decision had been made by the unari-
| NOUS concurrence of the judges, and
without any apparent partisan bias, and
| in accordance with the legal expectation
| and with the steady practice of the de-
| partments throughout our history, and
| had been in no part based on assumed
| historical facts which are not really
true; or, if wanting in some of these, it
had been before the court more than
once and had there been affirmed and
| reaffirmed through course of years, it
then might be, perhaps would be, fac
tious, nay, even revolutionary not to
acquiesce in a precedent. But when,
as is true, we find 1t wanting in all of
these claims to the public confidence, it
is not resistance, it is not factious 1t is
not even disrespectful, to treat 1t as not