WILSON LAW CLOSED FACTORIES
The repeal of the McKinley law in 1893 closed down factories and manufactories by the hundred and deprived tens of thousands of American workmen of employment.
UNDER THE OPERATIONS OF THE MCKINLEY LAW THE WAGE EARNERS OF THE UNITED STATES WERE RECEIVING EVERY SATURDAY NIGHT A LITTLE OVER $41,000,000. UNDER THE OPERATION OF THE WILSON LAW THEY ARE RECEIVING A LITTLE LESS THAN $19,000,000 AS A SATURDAY NIGHT PAY ROLL, A FALLING OFF OF OVER $22,000,000 PER WEEK TO THE WAGE EARNERS OF THIS COUNTRY.
If you ask me what has been the most unfortunate and appalling result of this wonderfully shrunken pay roll, I will answer by saying that American workingmen by the thousands have lost the roof that covered their heads for themselves and families, have been turned into the highways and are beggars to-day in the most unfortunate sense of the word. The questions of free trade and protection however, have practically been relegated into the background this year, and the sixteen-headed monster of free silver pushed to the front.
FELLOW CITIZENS, FREE TRADE AND FREE SILVER ARE TWIN SISTERS OF INFAMY, THE ASSERTIONS OF MR. HARVEY TO THE CONTRARY NOTWITHSTANDING.
It was the province of the Republican party four years ago to send forth its protests and warnings against free trade, and to-day with equal vehemence it is sending forth its warnings against destroying the high standard of our nation's finance, and reducing this country to a second class basis of silver monometallism.
BREAD AND BUTTER THE ISSUE
FELLOW CITIZENS, THE PAPER ISSUE IN THIS CAMPAIGN IS ONE OF FINANCE, BUT THE REAL ISSUE IS ONE OF BREAD AND BUTTER. FREE TRADE DURING THE LAST THREE YEARS HAS PAUPERIZED ITS TENS OF THOUSANDS, BUT THIS FREE SILVER CRAZE, IF PLACED UPON OUR STATUTE BOOKS, WILL PAUPERIZE ITS HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS.
My friends, I believe, and believe most earnestly, with every throb of my heart, that in the present campaign the Republican party is the only true friend silver has. We seek to elevate the silver dollar, our opponents seek to debase it. The Republican party has provided a redeemer for every silver dollar. Our opponents seek to destroy and alienate this redeemer. If the silver dollar was not exchangeable with gold, it would not be worth any more than a Mexican dollar, or not as much, for there is less silver in it. Coin's Financial School and free silver advocates generally, have much to say about the money of the constitution. Let me say to you, the money of the constitution was based upon the relative market value of the two metals. The history of the last 404 years, from 1492 to 1896, is replete with evidence proving beyond the question of a doubt that the relative or market value of these metals is continually changing. When Columbus discovered America in 1492, ten ounces of silver would purchase one ounce of gold; when the Pilgrim Fathers landed on the rocky and barren coast of New England in 1620, thirteen ounces of silver would purchase one ounce of gold; in 1792 fifteen ounces of silver would purchase one ounce of gold. In 1873 one ounce of gold would not purchase sixteen ounces of silver. To-day one ounce of gold will purchase almost thirty-two ounces of silver.
THIS FLUCTUATION OF VALUES OF THE TWO METALS IS CONTROLLED, NOT BY LAWS WE SPREAD UPON OUR STATUTE BOOKS, BUT BY THE LAW OF SUPPLY AND DEMAND, GOVERNED BY THE COST OF PRODUCTION.
JACKSON AND JEFFERSON
The patriotism and statesmanship of Andrew Jackson and Thomas Jefferson were untainted in 1792 by the dangerous influence of a coterie of silver barons. They simply ascertained as nearly as they could the relative or market value of the two metals, and determined the legal from the commercial ratio, placed them side by side and started our mints going with the unlimited coinage of gold and silver at the ratio of 15 to 1. As a matter of fact they had overvalued silver; that is to say, the gold dollar was worth 100 cents, but the silver dollar was only worth 98 cents. Now the rank and file of our forefathers cared very little about the discrepancy of the 2 cents on the dollars, but the money changers were abroad in the land in 1792, the same as they are in 1896, and whenever a gold coin came into their possession it was quietly retired from circulation. In other words, the cheaper money drove out of circulation the higher priced money, and as a result, we had silver as the only hard money currency circulating in this country from 1792 to 1834. Let me quote Thomas Jefferson's own words. In speaking of the ratio of the two metals, he says:
"THE PROPORTION BETWEEN THE VALUES OF GOLD AND SILVER IS A MERCANTILE PROBLEM ALTOGETHER."
What statement could be clearer and more concise than that? It being a mercantile problem, it of course was understood to be subject to fluctuation and change. Accordingly, in 1834 our forefathers concluded as their first attempt at a double standard had utterly failed in keeping the two metals circulating side by side as money, that they would change the ratio from 15 to 1 to 16 to 1, which they did. It seems this ratio undervalued silver, that is to say, the gold dollar was still worth 100 cents, but the silver dollar was worth from 102 to 103 cents. Gold at once became the hard money circulating medium in this country, silver the higher priced money, was entirely retired by the money changers, bullion dealers and silversmiths. This is another illustration where the cheaper money drove out of circulation the higher priced money.
GREENBACKS WERE CHEAP MONEY
In 1861 our country was engaged in civil war, and the greenbacks were issued as money, and were at once looked upon as a cheaper money than either gold or silver and immediately drove both gold and silver out of circulation and kept them out of circulation for seventeen years, or until we resumed specie payment in 1879. The history of these seventeen years is another instance where the cheaper money was victorious and drove out of circulation the higher priced money. Mr. Harvey no less than four times in his recent speech in this city gave the following definition of bimetallism: "Bimetallism is the right to use either of the two metals for money." This condensed answer bears about the same relation to the correct definition of bimetallism as the Boy Orator of the Platte compares with those intellectual giants whom he seeks to imitate, but without success, the immortal Washington and Lincoln. (Applause). Bimetallism as is understood in the discussion of our financial question, is the use of both gold and silver as money; both legal tender money, and the legal ratio between the two metals determined from the commercial ratio. Throughout Mr. Harvey's published works and lectures we find him affirming the false principle that money is a creature of law, and that by operation of law the commercial ratio between gold and silver can be made to conform with the legal ratio of 16 to 1. Let us follow the author of "Coin's Financial School" for a few moments, and see where this false principle will carry us.
TO-DAY THE COMMERCIAL RATIO BETWEEN SILVER AND GOLD IS ABOUT 32 TO 1. MR. HARVEY CLAIMS THAT IF HIS THEORIES ARE SPREAD UPON OUR STATUTE BOOKS THAT IN A VERY SHORT TIME THE COMMERCIAL RATIO WILL BE 16 TO 1. IF MR. HARVEY POSSESSES THE SUPERHUMAN POWER OF REDUCING THE VALUE OF GOLD ONE-HALF, OR DOUBLING THE PRICE OF SILVER, WHICHEVER YOU WILL, AND BRING THEM TO A COMMERCIAL PARITY AT 16 TO 1, THEN INDEED WOULD HE BE FALSE TO THE CITIZENS OF THIS REPUBLIC IF HE DID NOT ADD A LITTLE MORE POWER TO HIS "KEELEY-MOTOR" THEORY, (APPLAUSE) AND MAKE THE COMMERCIAL RATIO BETWEEN GOLD AND SILVER 15 TO 1, THE SAME AS IT WAS IN 1792, OR BETTER STILL, IF IT IS A BLESSING TO HUMANITY TO LOWER THE RATIO BETWEEN GOLD AND SILVER, THEN APPLY A LITTLE MORE OF THIS OCCULT POWER AND MAKE THE RATIO 13 TO 1, THE SAME AS IT WAS IN 1620, WHEN OUR ANCESTORS CAME OVER IN THE MAYFLOWER; OR APPLY THE SAME FORCE WITH RENEWED ENERGY AND BRING THE RATIO DOWN TO 10 TO 1, THE SAME AS IT WAS IN 1492. INDEED, IF THIS PRINCIPLE IS A BOON TO HUMANITY, AND HIS THEORIES ARE NOT FALSE, WHY NOT PUSH THE WORK ALONG AND MAKE THE RATIO BETWEEN GOLD AND SILVER 1 TO 1? (APPLAUSE.)
My fellow citizens, in following my friend Harvey, you are led into a labyrinth abounding with impossibilities and as impracticable as the theory of perpetual motion. When the earth is proven to be flat instead of a globe, when water runs up-hill, when the law of gravitation ceases to be operative, when the tail wags the dog and not the dog the tail, then, and not till then, may we seriously consider these perpetual motion, "Keeley Motor" theories of Mr. Harvey and other double standard advocates. (Great Applause). If we were unable to keep both metals circulating side by side when there was a slight discrepancy of only two or three cents in their intrinsic value, does any intelligent or sane man believe for a moment whether he is a student of Coin's Financial School or not, that if we throw open our mints to the free and unlimited coinage of 52-cent dollars, that they would not at once drive out of circulation the $630,000000 of gold, now constituting more than one-third of our circulating medium? If gold, so important a factor in our medium of exchange both at home and abroad, should retire before silver – the cheaper money (and the light of experience surely proves that it would) can any one doubt that we would at once go on to a silver basis? Can any one doubt that the $625,300,000 of silver now used as money in this country would not instantly be cut in two so far as its purchasing power is concerned – that is, shrink from 100 cents, its face or nominal value, to 52 cents, its bullion value? In the light of past experience it would surely be a sad commentary on our intelligence as an enlightened nation, if we had learned nothing in 100 years. If the illustrious Hamilton and Jefferson were alive, they would, by pursuing the same policy which actuated them in determining the money of the constitution, fix the ratio to-day at about 32 to 1, simply because the relative or market value of the two metals has varied to that extent.