The record-union., 1897-07-09

lar? Why, if man owns real es-
tate, and real estate rises, does not
the man profit? If he owns wheat and
wheat rises, is it not a good thing for
him? Is it not true of all property?
If he owns money, and money rises,
does he not gain an advantage? Why
does not he admit it?
Well, my friends, 1 think L have
found the reason. If a thing is good
for you and good for your neighbor al
so, you tell your neighbOr that it is
good both for you and for him; but if
thing is good for you and not good
for your neighbor, you are not so anx-
ious to admit that it is good for you:
and if it is good for you and actually
harmful to your neighbor, you are still
less apt to admit that you get any ben
eft from it.
And when l find the advocates of the
gold standard among the people who
have fixed investments, who own mon
ey and profit by the rise, and then find
that they deny that they get any ad-
vantage from the rise in the value OF
money, L am convinced that they favor
the gold standard because it is good for
them; and they deny that they get Il
benefit because they know it is not
good for the rest of the people. (Ap-
plause).
But let me give you the testimony OF
one other witness. Mr.. Carlisle spoke
in 1878, and said that the conspiracy
which seemed to have been formed in
this country and in Europe, to destroy
by legislation and otherwise, from
three-sevenths to one-half the metallic
money of the world, was the most gi-
gantic crime of this or any other age.
He said that If the enforcement of the
Bland Act, which gave an increase in
the volume Of the currency, and to
some extent interfered with the con-
summation Of the crime which he de-
scribed-he said that if the enforcement
of that law could be entrusted to a
public servant whose sympathies were
with the struggling masses who pro-
duce the wealth and pay the taxes OF
the country, rather than with the idle
holders Of idle capital, he would coin
the maximum instead Of the minimum
provided by law.
He divided society just as Mr. Blaine
and Mr. Sherman did. On the one
side he put the capitalistic classes; on
the other side the rest of the people.
This is the division which exists: The
money-ownfng class-the capitalistic
class-is on one side; the producers OF
wealth are on the other side And
when this question is understood, those
who sympathize with the struggling
masses will be on the side OF the larger
volume of money; and those who sym
pathize with the capitalistic classes
will be on the side of the gold standard,
a contraction of the currency and an
appreciated dollar.
My friends, if I We're to tell you what
I believe would be the result, if we con-
tinue, nation after nation, to adopt the
gold standard, I am afraid you would
guage; and therefore, when / want to
be really severe, / use the language of
somebody else; and when I want to be-
exceedingly severe-when get so mad
that nobody else's language will give ex-
preston to my indignation-then l turn
where he speaks of the consummation of
this scheme and says it would ultimate
ly entail more misery on the human
race than all the wars, pestilences and
famines that ever occurred in the his
tory of the world. That is what he says,
my friends, and you cannot imagine
anything worse than that. Think of all
the wars of history, and all of the misery
they have caused; think of the pesti-
Continued on Eighth Page.l