The Manning times. [volume] (Manning, Clarendon County, S.C.) 1884-current, 1898-02-23

IN uSL nave t4C SO4S ISS"I - as 1Sh = 90
European nations favo. the gold stand
ard. and can have bimetallism only
when they consent to it.
Recent events have demonstrated that
Europe has turned the money question
over to England, and England seews
to have turned it over to the Eoglish
fnanciers, who, on the 22i OF lastSep-
tember. met at the clearing house,
pledged themselvesto secrecy, decided
upon the gold standard, and thus de,
termiped our financial policy SIS long
as the Republican plan prevails.
MONEY QUESTION FIRST.
No one believes that bimetaillsm
will prove panacea for ali political
ills. best the money question must be
settled before other questions can be
reached. Financial independence is
a condition prg cedent to reform along
other lines. The power thst controls
cur financial policy can control the
policy OF our government en- every
other subject whenever occasion
arises for the exercise Of that control.
Suppose, for instance, that the Glcn
ey question were dropped and the
6eht against the trusts made the main
issue. Much foreign capital is invested d
in trusts, and foreign fnanciers could
announce that any legislation hostile
to trusts would be followed by the
withdrawal of foreign capital and a
panic. If Trey can threaten the with
drawal Of foreign capital to prevent q
change of our financial policy, tney
can threaten sucn withdrawal to pre-
vent the annihilation Of trusts or the
regulation OF other corporations.
Not only can this threat be made IN
regard to our domestic policy, but 1t
can be made to prevent the adoption
of any foreign policy which does not
meet with favor in Europe. We can.
not protect the rights Of our citizens,
avenge an insult TO the flag, enforce
The Monroe doctrine or express our
sym oathy with those who are strug
Cling to be free, If we are to be de-
tered By the threats, OF foreign invest
ors.
The right to legislate for our people
on the money question involves the
right to leeislate on all questions, and
until this rights secured the discus
sion OF other questions will avail
nothing.
When we have released ourselves
from the dictation of foreign fnan-
ciers and overthrown the local money
trust which controls our financial pol
icy we shall be in position to under.
take the determination OF other trusts
and the protection of our people from
al forms of monopolistic oppression.
''oTHER PLANKs NOT ABANDONED. r"
The other planks of the Chicsgo
platform are not abandoned Those
who favor free coinage al is to I'D.
vocate and will carry outall the other
reforms enumerated in the platform,
but they will not lessen the emphasis
placed upon the money question By
the party itself in its latest utterances.
But there are some who admit the
necessity for bimetallism and who
confess that it can only be secured oy
Independent action but suggest 8
change of ratio.
Tney ask, why 16 to l?
Ianswer that there are several rea-
sons. Sixteen to is the ratio at
which we had free coinage from 1884
to 1878. It is the ratio now existing
between the gold and silver coins in
circulation. and it is more favorable to
gold than the ratio now existing IN
most European countries.
To change the ratio by independent
action, beside changing existing con-
tracts, lessening our currency and IN,
curing great expense, would put us
out of harmony with other nations,
especially would it put US out of har
mony with France, the European ra-
ton most friendly to silver, where
the ratio is Is 3 to /.
If by international agreement we
should change the ratio to 80 to 1, for
Instance, it would necessitate the re
coinage OF more than four billions OF
silver into coins twice as large (pro-
vided the change vas made by ircreas
ing the size of the silver coins).
To double the size of silver coin of the
world would iminish by one bali the
silver money of the world; it would
diminish by one quarter the entire
volume of metallic money OF the
world.
Such q shrinkage in the volume OF
money would, ia effect, add billions
of dollars to the debts of the world
Should SO great an injury be done
without the necessity for it being prov
en- beyond a reasonable doubt2