The record-union., 1897-07-09


which underlie this subject SO plain that
every citizen here. whether he be young
or old, will be able to understand what
the money question means, and on
which side his interests lie.
| ! never claimed to be a precocious
child; never boasted, that 1 learned
things earlier than other children; and
yet l can admit, without being charged
with egotism that I cannot remember
when, as child, was so young that
did not have sense enough to know that
when one end of a teeter-board went up
| the other went down. And the money
question is as simple as this: When
dollars go up, property goes down. Dol
| lars cannot buy more unless property
! sells for less.
| When you want dollar Of the largest
purchasing power, it means that you
want property of the least selling power.
| Who prospers by a rising dollar? The
owner of dollars. Who suffers by fall
| ing property? The owner of property.
To make it clearer let me use another
| Illustration: Suppose that we were
walled in and must live for a year upon
the food which we had within the in
! closure; and suppose We had enough
wheat to last for year, and that, TAX
/ ing supply and demand into considera-
! tlon wheat was worth a dollar a buShel;
| and suppose it was divided into two
great piles, one man owning one pile,
another man owning the other each pile
containing half; and suppose, some
| night, one pile of wheat should burn,
leaving us all to be fed with the other
half. What would be the result? Why,
in the first place, every bushel of wheat
in the pile that did not burn would rise
in value; every bushel would sell for
more money. That is the first thing you
learn; and any ten-year-old child would
| understand it.
| What next? Why, if that wheat rose
| in value the man who owned the wheat
would profit by the rise; he would have
as many bushels as he had before, and
every bushel would buy more money.
Therefore he would profit.
| And what next? Why, he would be
/ glad that it was the other mans wheat
that burned instead of his If it were
accidental he would say: How for
tunate he was that his wheat was
spared, and by being spared, he gained
the profit But suppose instead of the
|
owned the wheat that did not burn had
actually burned the other pile of wheat
in order to make his wheat worth more
than it was before. Why, my friends,
! if it We're accidental you would say
he was lucky man; if he burned the
wheat himself, in order to raise the
value of his wheat, you would send
him to the penitentiary, because he
would be guilty of arson.
| Apply the Illustration to the money
question. We have in the world two piles
of money-the silver pile and the gold
pile. They contain each about the same
amount, because, with all the toll and
struggle, with all the saving mankind
has preserved about an equal amount
of gold and silver coin in the world.
Suppose that you destroy one pile 1t
matters not whether it be the gold pile
or the silver pile; but the intention now
is to destroy the silver pile. They want
to drive it out of existence as standard
money; they rejoice when a new nation
goes to the gold standard
| Suppose you complete the work an
nihilate silver as a standard money,
and leave gold alone to furnish the
standard money of the world. What
]
will rise in value When wheat rose, a
bushel of wheat brought more money.
When money rises a dollar of money
will buy more wheat.
And what is the next thing you learn?
Why, the man who owns the money
will profit by the rise; and if, instead of
owning money, he owns contracts pay
able in dollars, he win profit just as
/ he cot
ber of dollars, and each dollar has in
creased in purchasing power.
What is the next thing you learn =?
Why, the man who owns the money,
and whose money rises in value, is
very likely to be glad that money went
up in value instead of down. If money
goes up without his own act, he may
call himself fortunate. But suppose
that he joins with other money owners
to destroy half the money of the world
in order to make his money more val
liable. What do you call him then ?
You don't treat him like you treat the
man who burns his neighbor's wheat
in order to make his own wheat more
valuable.
When men conspire to destroy part
of the money, in order to make money
of their own property, you call them
patriots, and financiers, and advocates
of honest dollars" (Cheers)
That, my friends, is the difference
between doing wrong ON a small scale
and doing wrong ON a large scale.
1 believe it was Cicero who said to his
son: DO not engage in a retail busi-
ness; the retail business is a small bust
ness-a common sort of a business.
Engage in a wholesale business, be-
cause the wholesale business is a re-
spectacle business" And so, my friends,
the man who would destroy hundred
dollars of his neighbor's property is
doing wrong so small that he ought to
be sent to the penitentiary. But when
men conspire to rob the toilers of mill
ions and billions they work on a whole
sale plan, and become respectable be-
cause of the magnitude of the work
they do. (Cheers.)
I have tried to illustrate this prin-
ciple by applying an everyday prin-
ciple by illustrations familiar to you
all. Now, l want to prove the cor
rectness of that application by quot
ing what others have said, and L do
not intend to quote from any silver
men either I am going to take my
authority from those who cannot be
accused of silver fanaticism. L will
first call the present Secretary of
State, John Sherman, as a witness to
the correctness of the proposition
which I have laid down. He was a
United States Senator in 1869, and he
Soid tbau that the contraction of fhe