Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

BRTAMRESS The Democratic Candidate’s Formal Acceptance of the Presidential Nomination. Mr. Chairman, Gentlemen of the Committee and Fellow Citizens—l Bhall nfc a future day and in a formal letter aooept t.ho nomination wiiich is now ten dered by the notification committee, mid I •hall at that time touch upon the issues presented by the platform. It is fitting, however, that at this time, in the presence of those here assembled, I speak at some length in regard to the caniivdgn upon which we are now entering. Wo do not underestimate thlp forces arrayed against ns, nor aro we unmindful of the impor tance of the struggle in which we are en gaged,- hut, re!|iih? for success upon the ’ righteousness of ojir cause, woshall defend with all possible vigor the positions taken by our party. We are not surprised that some of our opponents, In the uiiseneo of better argument, resort to abusive epithets, but they may rest assured that no lan guage, however violent, no invectives, however vehement, will lend us to depart a single hairbreadth from the course marked out by the national convention. Tho citizen, either public or private, who assails the character and questions the pa triotism of tho delegates assembled in tho Chicago convention assails the character and questions tho patriotism of the mil lions who have arrayed, themselves under the banner there raised. It lias lieen charged by men standing high In business and political circles that our platform Is a menace to private secur ity nnd public safety, and it has been as serted that those whom I have the honor for tho time being to represent not only meditate an attack upon tho rights of property, but aro the foes both of social order and national honor. Those who stand upon tho Chicago plat form aro prepared to make known and to defend every motive which influence., them, every purpose whieli animates them and every hope which Inspires them. They un derstand tho genius of our institutions, they are stanch supporters of tho form of government under which we live, and they ulld their fuith upon foundations laid by the fathers. Andrew Jnekson lias stated, with admlrahlo clearness and with an em phasis which cannot lie surpassed, lioth the duty and the sphere of government. He said: “Distinctions in society will al ways exist under every just government. Equality of talents, ol' (‘duration or of wealth cannot be produced by human in stitutions In.the full enjoyment of tho gifts of heaven and tho fruits of superior industry, economy and virtue every man is equally out y led to jprotoifflon by lew.” We yield to nope in our devotion to tho doc trine just enunciated. Our campaign lias not for Its object tho reconstruction of so ciety. Wo cannot Insure to tho vicious tlio fruits of a virtuous life; wo would not In vade the horn® of the provident in order to supply tho wants of the spendthrift; wedo not propose to transfer tho rewards of in dustrv to tho lap of indolence. Property is gnd will remain tho stimulus to endeavor and tho compensation for toil. We be lieve, as asserted in the Declaration of In dependence, that all men are creuted equal, but that does not mean that all men aro or con bo equal in possessions, in ability or In merit. It simply means that all shall Stand equal before ttie law, and that gov ernment, officials shall not, in making, con struing or enforcing the law, discriminate between citizens. (Juntos From President I.Heroin. I assort that property rights, as well as tho rights of persons, an' sale in tho hands of the common people. Abraham Lincoln, In ills message sent to congress in Decem ber, 18(11, said, “No men living are more worthy to bo trusted than those who toil up from poverty, none less inclined to take or touch aught which they have not honestly earned. ’ 1 I repeat his language with unqualified approval and join with him In the warning which he added— namely, “Let them beware of surrender ing n political power which they already possess, and which power, if surrendered, will surely lx' used to close the doors of ad vancement against such as they and to fix new disabilities and burdens upon them till nil of liberty shall be lost.” Those who daily follow tho injunction, "In the sweat of thy face shall thou eat bread.’’ aro now, as they e' - cr have been, the bulwark of law and order, tho source of our nation’s greatness in time of peace and its surest defenders in time of war. But I have only rend a part of Jackson’s Utterance, Lot me givo you his conclusion, •‘But when the laws undertake to add to those natural and just advantages artificial distinctions, to grant titles, gratuities and exclusive privileges, to make tho rich rich er and the potent more powerful, tho hum ble members of society, tho farmers, me chanics aud the day laborers, who have neither the time north® means of securing like favors for themselves, have a right to complain of the injustice of their govern ment" Those who support the Chicago platform Indorse oil of the quotation from Jackson, the latter part ns well as the forme* part. The Income Tax Decision. VThlle the money question overshadows all other questions in importance, I desire it distinctly understood that 1 shall offer no apology for tho income tax plank of tho Chicago platform. The last incomo tax law sought to apportion tho burdens of government more equitably among those who onjoy tho protection of the govern ment At present the expenses of the fed eral government,collected through internal revenue taxes and import duties, are espe cially burdensome upon tho poorer classes of society. A law which collects from some citizens more than their share of the taxes og)d collects from olbsr clttew lesi than their share Is simply an indirect, Tomans of transferring ode man’s property to an other man’s pocket, and while tlie process taay be quite satisfactory to the men who ■escape just taxation it can never be satis factory to those who are overburdened. The last income tax law, with its exemp tion provisions, when considered in con nection with other methods of taxation in force, was not unjust to the possesses of large incomes, because they were not com pelled to pay a total federal tax greater than their share. The income tax is not new, nor is it based upon hostility to tlie rich. The system is employed in several of tho most important nations of Europe, and every income tax law now upon the statute books in any land, so far as I have been able to ascertain, oontains an exemp tion clause. While the collection of an In come tax in other countries does not make it necessary for this nation to adojit the system, yet it ought to moderate the lan guage of those who denounce the income tax ns an assault upon the well to do. Not only shull I refuse to apologize for the advocacy of an income tax law by the national con vention, but I shall also refuse to apologize for the Exercise hy it of the right to dissent from a decision of t.ho su preme court. In a government like ours every public official ijl a public servant, Whether lie holds offifce by election or by appointment, whetherfhe serves for a term of years or during g*xAd behavior, and the people have a right to criticise his official acts. “Confidence is everywhere the parent of despotism. Free government exists in jealousy and not in confidence. ” Theseare the words of Thomas Jefferson, and I sub mit that they present a truer conception of popular government than thut entertained by those who would prohibit an unfavor able comment upon a court decision. Truth will vindicate itself. Only error fears free speech. No public official who con scientiously discharges his duty as he secs it will desire to deny to those whom he serves tho right to discuss his official con duct. The Paramount Question. Now let me ask you to consider tho para mount question of this campaign—the money question. It is scarcely necessary to defend the principle of bimetallism. No national party during the entire history of the United States bus ever declared against it, and no party in this campaign lias hud the temerity to oppose it. Three parties— the Democratic, Populist and Silver par ties—have not only declared for bimetal lism, but have outlined tho specific legisla tion necessary to restore silver to its an cient position by the side of gold. The Republican platform declares that bimetal lism is desirable when it pledges tho Re publican party to aid in securing itas soon as the assistance of certain foreign nations can 1)0 obtained. Those who represented tho minority sentiment in the Chicago con vention opposed tho free coinage of silver by the United States by independent ac tion on the ground that, In their judgment, it “would retard or entirely prevent tho establishment of International bimetal lism, to which tho efforts of the govern ment should be steadily directed." When they asserted that the efforts of the govern ment should lx) steadily directed toward thy establishment of Intern bimetal lism, they condemned nißemotallist/i. Thh gold standard has been flr 'tied in flic balance and found wanting. "ake from it the powerful support of the money owning ami the money changing classes, and it can not stand for one day in any nation in the world. It was fastened upon tho United States without discussion before the peo ple, and its friends have never yet been willing to risk a verdict before the voters upon that issuo. What is the test of honesty in money? It must certainly be found in the purchasing power of the dollar. An absolutely honest dollar would not vary in its general pur chasing power. It would be absolutely stable when measured by average prices. A dollar which increases in purchasing power is just asdishonest as a dollar which decreases in purchasing power. Professor Lauglilin, now of the University of Chi cago and one of the highest gold standard authorities. In his work on bimetallism not only admits that gold does not remain absolutely stable in value, but expressly asserts that “there is no such thing as a standard of value for future payments, either in gold or silver, which remains ab solutely invariable.” He even suggests that a multiple standard wherein the unit is “based upon the selling prices of a num ber of articles of general consumption" would lie a more just standard than either gold or silver, or both, because “a long time contract would thereby be paid at its maturity by the same purchasing power as was given in the beginning." Purchasing Power of the Dollar. It cannot bo successfully claimed that ■monometallism or bimetallism or any oth er system gives an absolutely just stand ard of value. Under both monometallism and bimetallism tlx* government Axes the weight and fineness of j the dollar, Invests it. with logoi tender vitalities and tlvqr opons the mints to its u(nrestricted coinage, leaving tho purchasing power of the dollar to bedetermined by the number of dollars. Bimetallism Is better than monometallism not lwcauso it gives us a perfect dollar— thaljfe, a dollar absolutely unvarying in Its general purchasing power—but because It makes a nearer approach to stability, to honesty, to justice, than a gold standard possibly can. Prior to 1873, when there were enough open mints to permit all the gold and silver available for coinage to And entrance into the world’s volume of stand ard money, the United States might have maintained a gold standard with loss in jury to the people of this country, but ! now, when each step toward a universal i gold standard enhances the purchasing I power of gold, depresses prices and trans fers to the pockets of the Creditor class an unearned increment, the influence of tb ; s great nation must be thrown upon the side of gold unless wo are prepared to acce t j the natural and legitimate consequences of | such an act. Any legislation which lessens 1 tho world’s stock of standard money in creases tho exchangeable value of the dol lar. Therefore the crusade against silver ; must inevitably raise the purchasing pow : or of money and lower the money value of j all other forms of property, i The farmers are opposed to the gold [ standard because they have felt Its effects. Since they sell at wholesale and buy at re tall they have loot mere than they have gained by failing prices, and besides this they have found that certain fixed charges have not fallen at all. Taxes have not been jierceptibly decreased, although it re quires more of farm products now than formerly to secure the money with which to pay taxes. Debts have not fallen. The fanner who owed SI,OOO is still compelled to pay 11,000, although it may be tw'oe as difficult a formerly to obtain the dol lars with which to pay the debt. Railroad rates have not been reduced to keep pace with falling prices, and besides these Items there are many more. The farmer has thus for'Ml it more and more difficult to live Has he not a just complaint against the gold standard? / Effect on Wage Earners. Tbt; wage earners have been Injured hy a gold standard and have expressed them selves upbi the subject with great eni phasic In February, 1896, a petition ask ing fdr the immediate restoration of the free a*d unlimited coinage of gokl and sil ver at 16 th 1 Was signed by the represent ativoiiof all, or nearly all, tho leading la bor ofrganlza'ions and presented to con gress,! Wage baftiers know that while a gold fpftlMVird raises the purchasing power of t fie dona; it also makes it more diffi cult to (jptal'# possession of the dollar. They knv that ewnl'-ywtnt is less per manent, Iw® 6 f \S orl * more probable and rp>-eniploao e certain. & gold stand ard cnctoffagdl' the hoarding ft money be cause money is rising. It alsp discourages enterprise and paralyzes industry. On the other hand, the restoration of bimetallism will discourage hoarding because when prices are steady or rising money cannot afford to lie idle In the bank vaults. The fanneri* and wage earners together consti tute a considerable majority of the people of the country. Why should their interests be ignored in considering financial legis lation? A monetary system which is pecun iarily advantageous to a few syndicates lias far less to commend it than a system which would give hope and encouragement to those who create the nation’s wealth. el ur opponents have made a special ap peal to those who hold fire and life insur ance policies, but these policy holders know that, since the total premiums received ex ceed the total losses paid, arising standard must be of more benefit to the companies than to the policy holders. Much solicitude has been expressed by our opponents for the depositors in savings banks. They constantly parade before these depositors the advantages of a gold standard, but those appeals will bo in vain because savings bank depositors know that under a gold standard there is increasing danger that they will lose their deposits be cause of the inability of tho banks to col lect their assets, and they still further know that, if the gold standard is to con tinue indefinitely, they may be compelled to withdraw their deposits in order to pay living expenses. It is only necessary to note the increas ing number of failures in order to know that a gold standard is ruinous to mer chants and manufacturers. These business men do not make their profits from the people from whom they borrow money, but from the people to whom they sell their goods. If iho people cannot buy, retailers jicftiarj if -retailers cannot sell, wMolcwule morcHants ii/id manufacturers must/go into bankruptcy. Those wlio hold as a permanent invest ment tho stock of railroads and of other enterprises (I do not include those who speculate in stocks or use stockholdings as a means of obtaining an inside advantage in construction contracts) are injured by a gold standard. The rising dollar destroys the earning power of these enterprises with out reducing their liabilities, and. as divi dends cann< be paid until salaries and fixed charges have been satisfied, the stock holders must bear the burden of hard times. Salaries in business occupations depend upon business conditions, and the gold standard both lessens tho amount and threatens the permanency of such salaries. Official sa.aries, except the salaries of those who hold office for life, must, in the long run, be adjusted to the conditions of those who pay the taxes, and if the present financial policy continues wo must expect the contest between tho taxpayer and the tax eater to increase in bitterness. The Professional Classes. The professional classes, in the main, de rivo their support from the producing classes and can only enjoy prosperity when there is prosperity among those who create wealth. I have not attempted to describe the ef fect of tho gold standard upon all classes —in fact, I have only had time to men tion a few—but each person will be able to apply the principles stated to his own oc cupation. It must also be remembered that it is the desire of people generally to convert their earnings into real or personal property. This being true, in considering any tem porary advantage which may come from a •ystemjjnder wffiich the dollar rises in its ’purchasing power it must not be forgot ten that tho dollar cannot buy more than formerly unless property sells for less than formerly. Hence it will be seen that a large portion of those who may find some pecuniary advantage in a gold standard will discover that their losses exceed their gains. It is sometimes asserted by our oppo nents that a bank belongs to the debtor class, but this is not true of any solvent bank. Every statement published by a solvent hank shows that the assets exceed the liabilities—that is to say, while the bank owes a large amount of money to its depositors it not only has enough on hand in money and notes to pay its depos itors. but in addition thereto has enough to cover its capital and surplus. When the dollar is rising in valuo slowly, a bank may, by making short time loans and taking good security, avoid loss, but when prices are falling rapidly the bank Is apt to lose more because of jfaid debts than it can gain by the increase jnhe purchasing power of its capital aiujU^Hras. Contraction of ■■prenej. Let me say a word regard to cer tain persons who are pecuniarily benefited by a gold standard, and who favor it not from a desire to trespass upon the rights of others, but because the circumstances which surround them blind them to the effect of the sold standard upon others. I shall ask you to consider the language of two gentle men whose long public service and high standing in the party to which they belong will protect them from adverse criticism by our opponents. In 1869 Senator Sher man said: ' ‘ The contraction of the cur rency is a far more distressing operation than senators suppose. Our own and other nations have gone through that oper ation before. It is not possible to take that voyage without the sorest distress. To ev ery person, except a capitalist out of debt or a salaried officer or annuitant, it is a period of loss, danger, lassitude of trade, fall of wages, suspension of enterprise, bankruptcy and disaster. It means ruin to all deulers whose debts are twice their business capital, though one-third - less than their actual property. It means the fall of all agricultural production without any great reduction of taxes. What pru dent man would dare to build a house, a railroad, a factory or a barn with this cer tain fact be,.,re him?” As I have said be fore, the salaried officer referred to must be the man whose salary is fixed for life and not tt whose salary depends upon busiD- s conditions. When Mr. Sher man describes contraction of the currency as disastrous to all the people except the capitalist out of debt and those who stand in a position similar to his, he is stating a truth which must be apparent to every per son who will give the matter careful coto iideration. Mr. Sherman was at that time speaking of the contraction of the volume of paper cu incy, but the principle which he set forth -pplies if there is a contrac tion of the volume of the standard money of the world. Mr. Blaine discussed the same principle in connection with the demonetisation of silver. Speaking in the house of represent atives on the 7th of Feburary, 1878, he said: “I bel ve the struggle now going on in this country and other countries for a single gold standard would, if successful, produce widespread disaster in and throughout the commercial world. The destruction of silver as money and the establishing of gold as the sole unit of value must have a ruinous effect on all forms of property except those invested Which yield a fixed return in money. These would be enormously enhanced in value and would train a disDroDortionate and unfair advantage over every other species of property.” Is it strange that the “hold ers of investments which yield a fixed re turn in money” can regard tlie destruction of silver with complacency? May we not expect the holders of other forms of prop erty to protest against giving to money a “disproportionate and unfair advantage over every other species of property?” If the relatively few whose wealth consists largely in fixed investments have a right to use the ballot to enhance the of their investments, have not the rest of the people the right to use the ballot to pro tect themselves from the disastrous conse quences of a rising standard? The people who must purchase money with the prod ucts of toil stand in a position entirley dif ferent from the position of those who own money or receive a fixed income. The well being of the nation —aye, of civilization it self—depends upon the prosperity of the masses. What shall it profit us to have a dollar which grows more valuable every . day if such a dollar lowers the standard of_ LdvilizAtlon ajrd brings distress tJ the pie? What shall It profit us if iistrying to raise our credit by increasing the purchas ing power of cur dollar we destroy our ability to pay the debts already contracted by lowering the purchasing power of tlie products with which those debts must lie paid? If it is asserted, as it constantly is asserted, that the gold standard will en able us to borrow more money from abroad, I reply that he restoration of bimetallism will restore the parity between money and property, and thu£ permit an era of pros perity which will enable the American people to become loaners of money instead of perpetual borrowers. Even if we desire to borrow how long can we continue bor rowing under a system which, by lower ing the value of property, weakens tho foundation upon which credit rests? Even the holders of fixed investments, though they gain an advantage from the appreciation of the dollar, certainly see the injustice of the legislation which gives them this advantage over those whose in comes depend upon the value of property and products. If the holders of fixed in vestments will not listen to arguments based upon justice and equity, I appeal to them to consider the interests of posterity. We do not live for ourselves aloDe. Our la bor, our self denial and our anxious care, all these are for those who are to come aft er us as much as for ourselves, but we can not protect our children beyond the period of our lives. Let those who are now reap ing advantage from a vicious financial sys tem remember that in the years to come their own children and their children’s children may, through the operation of this same system, be made to pay tribute to the descendants of thoso who are wronged today. Necessity For Bimetallism. There is an actual necessity for bimetal lism as well as a theoretical defense of it. During tho last 23 years legislation has been creating an additional demand for gold, and this law created demand has re sulted in increasing the purchasing power of each ounce of gold. The restoration of bimetallism in the United States will take away from gold just so much of its pur chasing power as was added to it by the demonetization of silver by the United States. The silver dollar is now held up to the go'tl dollar by legal tender laws and not by redemption in geld, because the standard silver dollars are not now re deemable in gold either in law or by ad ministrative jiolicy. We contend that free and unlimited coin age by the United States alone will r;>is the bullion value of sliver to its coinage value, and thus make silver bullion worth $1.20 per ounce in gold throughout the world. This proposition is in keeping wit ii natural laws, not in defiance cf them. The best known law of commerce is the law of supply and demand. We recognize this law and build our argument upon it. We apply this law to money when we say that a reduction in the volume of money will raise the purchasing power of the dollar. We also apply the law of supply and de i maud to silver when we say that anew demand for silver created by law will raiso I the price of silver bullion. Gold and silver are different from other commodities in that they are limited in quantity, uorn. wheat, manufactured products, etc,, can be produced almost without limit, provided they can be sold at a price sufficient to stimulate production, but gold and silver are called precious metals because they are found, not produced. These metals have been the objects of anxious search as far back as history runs; yet, according to Mr. Harvey’s calculation, all the gold coin of the world can be melted into a 22 foot cube and all the silver coin in the world into a 66 foot cube. Because gold and silver are limited, both in the quantity now in hand and in annual production, it follows that legislation can fix the ratio between them. Any purchaser who stands ready to take the entire supply of any given article at a certain price can prevent that article from falling below that prioe. So the govern ment can fix a price for gold and silver by creating a demand greater than the sup ply. International bimetallists believe that several nations, by entering into an agree ment to coin at a fixed ratio all the gold aDd silver presented, can maintain the bullion value of the metals at the mint ratio. When a mint price is thus estab lished, it regulates the bullion prioe, be cause any person desiring coin may have the bullion converted into coin at that price, and any person desiring bullioij. can secure it by melting the coin. The only 1 question upon which international bimetal- J lists end independent bimetallists differ isj Can United States by the free and un-T limited coinage of silver at the present legal’ ratio create a demand for silver which, taken in connection with the de mand already in existence, will be suf ficient to utilize all tlie silver that will be presented at the mints? They agree in their defense of the bimetallic principle, and they agree in unalterable opposition to the gold standard. International bimetallists cannot complain that free coinage gives a benefit to the mine otmer, because inter national bimetallism gives to the owner of silver all the advantages offered by inde pendent bimetallism at the same ratio. In • ternational bimetallists cannot accuse tho advocates of froe silver of being “ bullion owners who desire to raise the value of their bullion,” or “debtors who desire to pay their debts in cheap dollars,” or “demagogues who desire to curry favor with the people.” They must rest their opposition upon one ground only—name! that the supply of silver available for coin age is too large to be utilized by the Unit ed States. A Reply to Criticism. Perhaps the most persistent misrepre sentation that W’e have to meet is the charge that we are advocating the payment of debts in 60 cent dollars. At the present time and under present laws a silver dol lar when melted loses nearly half its val ue, but that will not be true when we again establish a mint price for silver and leave no surplus silver upon the market to drag down the price of bullion. Under bi metallism silver bullion will be wobth as much ns silver coin, just as gold bullion is now wortn as much as gout com, and we believe that a silver dollar will be worth as much as a gold dollar. charge of repudiation comes with poor grace from those who aro seeking to add to the weight of existing debts by legislat ion which makes money dearer and -yris.-voittJcsai *ftoir Aligns ;%ifeist' the gen eral welfare under the euphonious pretense that they are upholding public credit and national honor. In answer to the charge that gold will go abroad, it must be remembered that no gold can leave this country until the own er of tho gold receives something in return for it which he would rather have. In other words, when gold leaves the country those who formerly owned it will be bene fited. There is no process by which we can be compelled to part with our gold against our will, nor is there any process by which silver can be forced upon us without our consent. Exchanges are mat ters of agreement, and if silver comes to this country under free coinage it will be at the invitation of somo ono in this coun try who will give something in exchange for it. Those who deny the ability of the Unit ed States to maintain the parity between gold and silver at the present legal ratio without foreign aid point to Mexico and assert that the opening of our mints will reduce us to a silver basis and raise gold to a premium. It is no reflection upon our sister republic to remind our people that the United States is much greater than Mexico in area, in population and in commercial strength. It is absurd to as sert that the United States is not able to do anything which Mexico has failed to accomplish. The one thing necessary in order to maintain the parity is to furnish a demand great enough to utilize all the silver which will come to the mints. That Mexico has failed to do this is not proof that the United States would also fail. It is also argued that, since a number of the nations have demonetized silver, noth ing can lie done until ull of those nations restore bimetallism. This is also illogical. It is immaterial how many or how few nations have open mints, provided arc sufficient open mints to furnish a etary demand for all the gold and available for coinage. In reply to the argument that improved j machinery has lessened the cost of produc- I lng silver, it is sufficient to say that the 1 same is true of the production of'gold, aud yet, notwithstanding that, gold has risen in value. Asa matter of fact, the cost of production does not determine the valuo of the precious metals, except as it may affect the supply. If, for instance, the cost of producing gold should be reduced 90 per cent without any increase in the out put, the purchasing power of an ounce of gold would not fall. So long as there is a monetary demand sufficient to take at a fixed mint price all the gold and silver produced the cost of production need not be considered. Prices of Gold and Silver. It is often objected that the prices of 1 gold and silver cannot be fixed in relation to each other because of the variation in the relative production of the metals. This argument also overlooks the fact that, if tho demand for both metals at a fixed price is greater than the supply of both, relative production becomes immaterial. In the early part of the present century the an nual production of silver was worth, at! j the coinage ratio, about three times as 1 taiich as the annual ntodpetion of gold,