New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1900-02-03
REPLY To A DANGEROUS ARGUMENT

REPLY To A DANGEROUS ARGUMENT
To the Editor of The Tribune
Sir: The letter you publish this morning tro,
Mr. j. Rice Winchell is correctly described bv vou
as lively; but animation. Imagination and
rhetoric do not make argument: neither doss
bald assertion. The reactionary appeaI mad.
against the splendid work which the education
ana discussion of the last four years have
wrought in public sentiment on the money cues
ton is so speciously put that it is dangerous
Mr. Winchel occupies the ground in this isst
year OF the century which thousands OF sncara
Republicans stood on twenty years ago. but
from which a gradual but steady advance has
been made. leaving him. as It seems uncon
sc4ously, In the border territory of the free
silver-populistic-a nti-imperialistic combination
now known as the Democratic party"
1t was just such reasoning as Mr. Wincherrs
which made so difficult the long uphill fight
against greenbacks first and free silver later
1t was just such misleading sentimentaIity about
"the money of the people and "the money Of
the millIonaires and speculdtors'' which gave
Bryan his finest opportunity in the attempt N
array the masses against the classes in the cam
paign of 1896 1t is the argument Of the derna-
gogue and the enemy OF social order.
Mr.. Winchel says the Republican party lid
not promise that if the Democratic party should
again come into power the credit OF the nation
should be maintained and all Calculations OF
money should be kept at gold value" and adds,
AS well might you expect to restrain an in
furiated bull by the nterposition Of a barrier OF
mosquito netting" The most inprovidens
farmer in the POpustic ranks IL he had an nm
manageable bull on his hands which only he
could master, would take precautions for tia
safety of his family and neighbors, providing ne
cared for them, by erecting a barrier OF q
more substantial nature than MOSQUITO netting
against the time when his restraining presence
should be taken away. If he couldn't KIN tns
bull, he would raise the strongest bazrfsp at his
command
But Mr.. Wincheu. knowing wen ma ouIrs
dangerous disposition says in effect: 'sIeavs the
barriers as they are. They weak The bull
could break through them. But don't think OF
strengthening them. The bull might break hts
horns or otherwise do injury to himself IN his
wild efforts TO escape" In other words because
the laws fairly clear and explicit now on
the subject Of the standard OF monetary value
and can be interpreted by friendly adrninistra-
tors so that no danger can result to the Stata
therefore their antiquities should not be cleared
up and their wording should not be so strength
ened that the most unfriendly could not NAL
administer them. Forsooth do not enact m
equivocaIly into law the principle OF administra-
ton which has saved the country from none
tary and industrial chaos. because it win give
Bryan chance to charge the Republican party
with having conspired 10 overthrow the money
of the people and replace IT with the money OF
the millionaires and SPECTATORS
NO MONEY TOO GOOD.
With arguments such as these one loses "a
thence. What is the money Of the peopIe?' II
is necessarily the best money the most stable
that of the largest purchasing power. All ex-
perience shows that wages, the measure OF labor
which is the peoples" source of income re-
spond less freely than other prices TO changing
conditions With a huctuating money medium
the Spectator and the millionaire can take care
of himself comparatively Well He can do il at
the expense of the people" He can nulct the
helpless wage Garner whose income remains sta
tlonary while the prices OF food clothing and
rents go soaring in the air He can feather his
own nest with the inferior medium which the
populist weeps about as tine money of the PEG
pie" before his victim gets wondering what
has happened. Under the gold standard and Re-
publican Administration wages have steadily
and materially increased for forty years not
only actually, in terms Of money. but in the
purchasing power OF the money unit as well.
The Mckinley Bryan campaign was fought
largely on that issue The result was not disas-
ter. but victory-viCtory through education.
Shall the Republican party shrink from fol-
lowing up the work OOth or education ana leSiS-
lation for fear that demagOgUes and fanatics
will continue the arguments that brought about
their defeat? That not the kind of courage
which enabled it to abolish slavery, effect the
resumption Of specie payments and bring about
our magnificent industrial development Run
ming away from the issue would have meant dis
aster then. and it viii mean it now. Courage in
the right won the day in 1861 in 1879 and in
1896 Why should cowardice win in 1900?
If the Republican pledge of 1895 to maintain
the gold standard meant anything it meant not
only the continuation OF the practices of twenty
years-yes. of over sixty years for practically
the United States has been the gold standsra
since 1S3i-but the strengthening and fortihsa-
tion of those practices by legislation. Mr. VIM
cheH says that supplementary legislation is
worse than useless, because a President Of the
Bryan type could not be expected TO obey the
law If he would not obey the law ne surely
would not obey precedent. but the consequences
of the disobedience of law would certainly be
more serious to him. one might we'll argue
against legislation to punish murder or theft be
cause some men could never be restrained from
killing or stealing 1t Is true that Mt. Bryan
and a friendly Congress could repeal or change
the law. So could murderers and thieves. II they
obtained control of the Government, repeal the
laws which interfere with their practices Thae
does not make it desirable for honest men TO lee
down the bars to them or to cease efforts 70 re-
form them and show them the error or heir
ways. 1t does not follow. then. as MI WncneI