Willmar tribune. [volume] (Willmar, Minn.) 1895-1931, 1899-11-08
THE SILVER ISSUE.
Gov. Stones Strong Position BE.
lieves in the Quantitive The
DRY of Money.


ly and forcibly. Read what he says
on the silver issue in recent speech:
"Silver is no fetish with me; neither
Is gold; neither is sixteen to one. Sill
yer and gold are simply instrumentali-
ties for the use of mankind, and six
teen to one expresses only a ratio of
value. believe in a quantitive theory
| OF money. I believe that the value of
property and labor are directly affect
ed by the quantity of money in gen.
eral use. When money is abundant and
seeking investment in the legitimate
industries of the country, the values
OF property increase and labor finds
reader employment at remunerative
wages. On the contrary, when money
is scarce and difficult to obtain, the
values of property fall and the laborer
finds employment more difficult and
wages lower. [ believe that only those
who have fixed incomes and capital
lists are benefited by an inadequate sup
ply OF money, and that all others are
| injuriously affected. What I want and
all want is money enough to easily
supply the monetary needs of the coun-
try and the world. If I believed that
gold alone would yield that supply I
would care nothing for silver. If I
believed that silver alone would yield
that supply I would care nothing for
gold. 1t is because I do not believe
that either metal, unaided by the other,
| can supply volume of money suffi-
cient to meet the legitimate require
ments Of business that advocate the
imperial use of both metals for mon
etary purposes.
IF both metals are coined impartial
~ into primary money they must be
coined at some given ratio prescribed
by law. I favor sixteen to one as that
ratio. 1 know that at this time and
under existing conditions, sixteen to
one is not the commercial ratio of value
between the two metals. l know that
an ounce of gold is commercially worth
twice 16 ounces of silver. Because that
is true our opponents say that sill
yer dollar coined on our theory at the
ratio of sixteen to one would be worth
only 50 cents and would have but one
half the purchasing power of the gold
dollar. They say that the cheaper
money would drive the dearer money
out of circulation and out of the coun-
try, and that we would soon find our
selves on silver basis. In consequence
OF this they say that enormous vest
ed Interests at home would be des-
perately embarrassed and our indus
| tries tod 1o4
exchange would rise and fuctuate so
violently as to make commerce with
foreign nations both difficult and I'M
profitable. I do not believe these ap-
prehensiOns are we'll founded. They
are all predicated on the idea of DIFF
ference in the value of the different dol
lars. If the party, so called, of the dol
lars should be maintained-by which I
mean if they should be kept of equal
value-then the dangers our opponents
apprehend would practically disappear.
If the silver dollar should be as valu-
able as the gold dollar; if the debt-pay-
ing and purchasing power of the two
should be equal, they would be inter-
changeable, and there would be no
more reason for boarding the one than
the other, and no more reason for the
flight of one to foreign countries than
of the other. Republican statesmen
and republicans generally-indeed,
everybody except those who are actu-
ated by selfish considerations admit
that bimetallism would be better for
the country, would be boon to the
country and to mankind as whole, it
it were only possible.
"But they say our policy is impracti-
cable for the reason that the dollars
would part company and that all the
evils they apprehend would follow as
a consequence. Now, democrats and
bimetallists believe as much in the
parity Of the dollar as the most ram
pant gold monometallist alive. If we
should secure the control of the gov
eminent, it is to be presumed and
should be presumed, that our states
men, actuated by honorable and pa
a way as to protect the interests of our
own people and country. The parity
of the dollar would be preserved.
'But they say the parity cannot be
preserved if the metals are coined with
out restriction at the ratio of 16 to /.
That is problematical; that is a mat
ter of opinion upon which capable and
prudent men are not agreed. We did
maintain the parity at that ratio, or
substantially that ratio, for so years.
know conditions have changed since
then. I know that France, Germany
and other nations, following US, as we
follow England, have gone to gold
basis since then; and I know that the
worlds production of the precious
metals has greatly increased since then
But know also that the population of
this country and the world has great
ly increased since then; and know also
that the business of this country and
the world has increased since then.
The need of an increasing volume of
money has kept pace with the increase
of population and business, and our
ability to act independently is rela-
lively greater now than ever before.
whether independent bimetallic
coinage can be maintained at the ratio
of 16 to 1, is question we may ad-
nit is not free from doubt. I think
it can be; others think it cannot be-.
There is but one way to test the ques-
ton and that is by experiment. If
we coin both metals at all, we must
have ratio. If not 16 to 1, what ?
We could not begin at the present
commercial ratio, for the free coin