The times. [volume] (Washington [D.C.]) 1897-1901, 1900-09-13


ing to Terrori2e the Voters
% Carl schurz has written the following
open letter to Lyman J. Gage. Secretary
of the Treasury:
ITO the Hon. Lyman J. Gage. Secretary OF
the Treasury:
Sir: The object of my open letter OF
September l was, by Offering means OF
escape from the dangers pointed out by
you, TO call public attention to the fact
that the present campaign is by no means
a repetition of that of 1856, and that the
money question now has no right 10 stand
in the way of fair consideration of other
important questions on their own merits
! thank you for the courtesy of your an
swer, but | must regret hat instead OF
favorably receiving my well-maant sug-
gestion, IL only shows TO what lengths
partisan zeal viii go in the attempt to
frighten the people into the belief that
only Mr.. McKinleys reelection can save
them from general ruin, and that no OBJ
lection to him in any other respect must
have any weight with them.
To help on the alarm. you quote from
a speech made by me in 1895, showing
what disastrous consequences ] predicted
would be brought on by the election of
Mr. Bryan / believed at the time. and
] believe now, that those consequences
would have followed had Mr.. Bryan been
elected then. after a campaign turning
wholly upon the financial issue. with no
existing law seriously to hamper him. and
with majorities in both houses of Con-
gress prospectiveiy al his back. But you
know as well as l do that circumstances
have essentially changed and that there
is an immense difference between Presi-
dent so elected and free to act and a
President elected after a campaign run
on other issues, with adverse majorities
in Congress, and bound hand and foot by
a law such as now exists, or as you and
your friends in power may still make it.
Is it quite ingenious, is it not doing vio-
lence to truth, TO quote words uttered
under one set of circumstances as appli-
cable to a set of circumstances so essen
TALLY different?
ITO my suggestion that. II the present
law is defective. the Republican Congress
and Administration would before the in
augura ton of the next President have
ample power and opportunity to prevent
the Executive action with its disastrous
consequences, which you so luridly depict,
YOU object that Congress would probably
find it difficult to use that power owing
TO possible obstructive tactics of the mi
nority Whatever those who insist upon
the necessity of Mr.. McKinley's re-elec-
fion Tor the preservation of the gold
standard may say, my parliamentary ex-
perience teaches me that if you, as Sec
rotary OF the Treasury, prepare f.IBPle
measure of remedial legislation and have
It introduced in Congress on the first day
cf the session. and the majority presses
il with sincere determination TO use all
legitimate means to overcome obstructive
tactics the three months of the session
-.ill be more than sufficient to put through
such a bill.
There will be no trouble about this II
the Republican majority is willing to do
it. Or do you suspect that it might not
be willing even if such action app Jared
necessary TO save the gold standard? II
not willing, then the Republicans would
be saying to the American people sub
stantially this: We are the men to main
tain the gold standard Therefore. you
must keep US in office and permit us u
do whatever else We please, however OBJ
noxious IL may be to you. For. II you
vote US out, we shall let the gold stand
ard go to perdition even while able to
save it. We have you by the throat and
mean to hold you So. If this be really
the spirit of the Republicans in power
the people viii soon conclude that they
are a public danger and "a nuisance and
ought to be got rid of at any cost You
certainly cannot wish your party to stand
in such q light.
Il repeat. therefore, that the Republi
can majority in Congress not only can.
but if only for lis own moral salvation,
viii DO this thing in case of necessity,
and you. Mr. Secretary then relieved of
your partisan campaign service, will, as
good citizen, be one OF the first to urge
ii to be done, if you sincerely think ihe
Currency law to be as defective az in
your recent threat OF disaster you repre-
sent it TO be.
But do you really think that II is so
defective and that the dangers you pre-
dicted owing to that effectiveness really
threaten In your letter you say hat,
since / had accepted for argument
sake your statements on these points,
there is no particular difference betgeel
US as to what Mr.. Bryan, as Pres dent,
could do under the law or in spite of
the law as II now is You must pardon
nc for observing Mr. Secretary, that
when you tell the public that / agree
with you On those points. you strain
the truth rather violently. Accepting
statement FOR arguments sake means
that We admit il only as a basis for rea-
Boning. while we may really hold an en-
tirely opposite opinion. And in this case
! have. indeed, strong authorities for
differing from you, and. curiously
enough. among these authorities you,
Mr.. Secretary. occupy a very prominent
interview on the identical points here in