The age-herald., 1898-02-09
WILLIHM JENNINGS BRYHN
 REPLIES TO MIR. MCEMhN
Defends His Position ln Making th6 MOD6u Qu6S-
 tiOn Paramount to HI Other Issues.

and thus determined our financial policy as long as the republican plan prevails.
 No one believes that bimetalism will prove 8 penaeea for all political ills, but the money question must be settled before other questions can be reached. Financial independence Is a condition precedent to reforms along other lines. The power that controls our financial policy can control the policy of oure government on every other subject whenever occasion arises for the exercise of that control. Suppose, for instance, that the money question were dropped and the fight against the trusts made the main issue. Much foreign capi- tai is invested in trusts, and foreign finan- ciers could announce that any legislation hostile to trusts would be followed by the withdrawal of foreign capital and a panic. If they can Threaten the withdrawal of for eign capital to prevent a change of our financial policy, they can threaten such withdrawal to prevent the annlhilatio1 of trusts or the regulation of other corpora
 tions. Not only can this threat be made in regard to our domestic policy, but it can
 be made to prevent the adoption of any
 foreign policy which does not meet with favor in Europe. We cannot protect the rights of our citizens, avenge an insult to the flag, enforce the Monroe doctrine or ex- press our sympathy with those who are struggling to be free, if we are to be de- tered by the threats of foreign investors. The right to. legislate for our people on the money question involves the right to legslate on all questions, and until this right is secured the discussion of other questions will avail nothing. When we have relieved ourselves from the dictation | of foreign f1nanciers and overthrown the | local money, trust which controls our finan- l cdal policy we shall be in a position to un- dertake the extermination of other trusts and the protection of our people from all forms of monopoaistic oppression.
 The other blanks of the Chicago plat form are not abandoned. Those who favor free coinage at 16 to 1 will advocate and carry out all the other reforms enumerated in the platform but they will not lessen the emphasis placed on the money ques- tion by the party itself in its latest utter ances
 But there are some who admit the neces- sity of bimetallism and who confess that it can only be secured by independent ac- tion, but suggest change of ratio. They ask, Why 16 to 1? I answer that there are several reasons. Sixteen to one is the ratio at which we had free coinage from 1884 to 1873. It is the ratio now existing between the gold and silver coins now in circulation, and it is more favorable to gold than the ratio now existing in most Eu- ropean countries.
 To change the ratio by independent ac- tion, besides changing existing contracts, lessening our currency and mourning great expense, would put us out of harmony with other nations; especially would 1t put us out of harmony with France, the Euro pean nation most friendly to silver, where the ratio is 15a to 1. If, by interpational
 agreement, we should change the ratio to 32 to 1, for instance, 1t would necessitate the recoinage of more than four billions | of silver into coins twice as large (pro- vided the change was made by increasing | the size of the silver. coins). To double the | size of the silver coin of the world would diminish by one-half the silver money of the world; 1t would diminish by one qu3rter the entire volume of the metallic money
 of the world. Such a shrinkage in the vol
 ume of money would in effect add billions of dollars of debts to the world. Should so great an injAry be done without the neces- sity for 1t being proven beyond reason-
 able doubt?
 Bimetallists contend that gold and silver have been driven apart by hostile legis,a- tion, and that they can be brought together by friendly legislation. They contend that legislation favorable to gold has increased the purchasing power of an ounce of gold throughout the world and lowered the gen.
 eral level of prices, while the same legisla- ton has lessened the demand for silver and lowered the gold price of that metal. They contend that the restoration of the free and
 unlimited coinage by a great nation like the United States will increase the demand
 for silver to a point where the hints will require all the surplus silver of the world, and thus, by raising the gold price of sil- yer and lowering the purchasing power of an ounce of gold will restore the parity at 16 to l, and thereafter maintain the parity at that ratio. It is true that some bime tal- lists do not believe that this nation alone can maintain the parity at that ratio, but shall the great majority who do believe surrender their conviction to the compara- lively few who doubt? Upon what prin- Af klxo
 jority the right to dictate platform? Those who are opposed to the gold stand ard must act together, and the plan of action must be determined by the majority.
 The moment tine ratio of 16 to 1 is sur rendered, our silver plank loses it's force.
 Those who oppose the ratio of IS to 1 are
 not agreed among themselves No con- siderable body of men ask for any other specific ratio. One man says 20 to 1, an- other 24, another 32 but all the objectors to- gether are small in number when compared with those who firmly believe in the abil- ity of this nation to maintain the parity at 16 to 1. If 1t is proposed to leave the ratio to congress, 1t must be remembered that those who desire bmetallism demand affirmative action, and every one opposed to the ratio fixed in any propesd bill will be counted against any kind of bimetallism. If the ratio is left to be determined by con- gressmen who run upon different platforms IL S1FeS u Cudice IoT d NdIlety OI TdldOS, which will effectually prevent any legfsla- tion favorable to bimetallism, and will also give chance for friends of the gold stand ard to slip into congress under the pre- tense of favoring some undefined ratio, but who, as matter of fact, would use their positions to maintain the gold stand ard.
 The ratio of 16 to has been adopted by the democratic party in a convention which, more than any recent convention, received its authority direct from the people. The rank and file of the party, instead of leav- ing the ratio to the leaders, expressed their own opinion upon the subject, and that opinion has not changed since the conyen- ton. This ratio has also been indorsed by the popuhst party, the national silver party and the silver republicans To abandon the ratio would be wrong in itself, and as im- polite as it would be wrong. If the demo- cratic party were to allow its policy on this question to be determined by a few doubting Thomases, or by the deserters who supported the enemy in the great struggle between democracy and plutoc- racy, it would lose the respect and confi- dence of those who now look to it as an efficient means of restoring government of