The American. (Omaha, Nebraska) 1891-1899, July 17, 1896, Image 1
THE AMERICAN THE AM tlC AN Cbeapest Pap ..America. Q1 Vur fntnat to ubaorib 9 or THE AMERICAN. 5O0 to Jan. I, I87. A WEEKLY NEWSPAPER. "AMERICA FPU AMERICANS" Wt hold that all men iw Americans who Swear Allegiance to the United Stato without a mental reservation. I'lUCE FIVE CENTS Volume V OMAHA, NEBRASKA, FRIDAY. JULY 17, 1S9C. Nombib 29 A ROM IRISH FIZZLE. The Much Advertised Meet ing of the Irish Military Union Not a Success. Largo Fart or the Population of Bridge port, Conn., Sot Aware That Their City Was the Meeting Place of the English Haters. Well, it was not the success prom ised. Bridgeport did not go wild over the military display, nor will Lord Salisbury ask Secretary of State Olney for an explanation. The friendly re lations existing between the United States and Great Britain will not be perceptibly strained by the grand en campment at Avon Park of the Irish American Military Union, supple mented by a polish artillery company from Newark to give a military aspect to the gathering. The affair had been written up for months in advance a la Barnum to whet the appetite of expec tation, and to teach the effete Ameri can population a proper respect for the Inherent military genius of the Irish race. It-is now all over, and notwith standing the assiduous labors of the pencil.pushers in a political campaign, hardly one in ten of the citizens of Bridgeport were aware that Camp Phil Sheridan ever existed, and seem to care less. Perhaps it would have fared better had some time other than the natal day of American Independence been selected. Therejls nothing particular which associates the Hibernians with that historic occasion except that Pat rick Henry took part therein, and Pat rick never, as far as heard from, laid any particular claim to being a Hi bernian in any sensejof the word. He left that to future generations of Pat ricks. He; was more interested during his time indrivlng the Patricks in the British army out of the Colonies to their fcomesacross the water than in flattering thelr;egotlsm by telling them that lnj fightlngjagainst the patriots that theywere 'doing heroic servloe in the cause -of civil and religious liberty. He seems 'to have lefjt this to a future generation of orators, who think more of votes thanthey do of the truth, and where American self-respect is not shocked in kissing the Blarney Stone at the invitation of the modern Pat ricks. Theigreat mass of the citizens of Bridgeport took more pleasure in reviewing the bicycle parade and cele brating the day on their "own hook" than in having the Hibernian thrust upon their notice on this occasion, and they were right. It is hardly in good taste for the Hibernian to attempt to monopolize a day which his progenitors were not in sympathy with. It is not unnatural that he -should do so as it is his nature toclaim the earth and that Adam was a Celt, any more than that the United1 States would never have had any existence had it not been for the Celtic population who had immi grated toj the Colonies, that it would have beenj-wiped out p' existence In 1812 but for Celtic heroism, and that it would have gone up in a baloon in 1861 but for themilltary and patrlotlo in stincts of "the .Hibernian population. Has not every Btumpospeaker in search of an Irish votebeen flattering their vanity on these topics until they now actually (believe such to be the fact, and when, ifjthey read history, which does not sustainithe orator, they know that it is an A.iP. A. lie and an emana tion of bigotry and intolerance. It is not improbable that in a generation or two hence there will be less of HI bernianism and (more of Americanism in the descendants of the Celts in the United States, o They will have more respect for the truths of history than for the fictions K)f stump orators. They will then know that the Irish popula tion did not rush impetuously Into the union army, to "fight ior the nagur" at the firstltcall, nor at the second call of "Uncle Abe" Wputdown the rebellion. On the contrary, the great bulk of the race werefnotonly lukewarm, but more of them were not backward in expres- sing their sympathy for the rebel cause and'inplaclng every obstacle at their command In the way of the other side. There were exceptions, it is true, but there was not enough patriot Ism among them In this state to fill a regiment notwithstanding Governor Buckingham's earnest efforts to enlist them in the service of the state, even to appealing to their Hlbernianism The efforts of Colonel Cahill to recruit a Hibernian regiment in the state promised to become a failure. Gover nor Buckingham and the adjutant- general of the state gave him every aid pon ible, but recruiting lagged and the Irishman held aloof. Captain Fitzzlb bon, who had gone to the front with a company on the first call and served three months, and on the discharge of his company at the end of their enroll ment immediately recruited another company, which was Incorporated in the 6tu regiment, was recalled from his command at the front by the governor to aid Colonel Cahill by exerting his Influence to assist in recruiting an Irish regiment. He was commissioned lieutenant-colonel of the regiment, but while he had hitherto found no diffi culty in raising recruits, the Irish did not rush Impetuously to fill what was intended to be a purely Hibernian regiment. They preferred casting votes against the administration to shooting bullets at their late political colleagues, and to get the company off his hands as a last resort Captain Frye's company attached to the 8th regiment was transferred to the 9lh, and the captain was consoled by being ap pointed Its major. This was the only attempt to recruit an Irish regiment made in this state. There were excep tions, honorable exceptions. There were Irishmen who enlisted, did faith ful duty as soldiers, and fought bravely side by side with their comrades who had also enlisted and did their duty as faithfully and fought as bravely, and who had never seen Ireland. All honor to them, but then there is no record of these exceptions arrogating to them selves the full credit of putting down the rebellion, or that if it had not been for their services the confederacy would have been a success. It 1b the other class of their countrymen, the men who had conscientious scruples against "fighting for the nagur" and against their late political colleagues who, they claimed, were fighting for their rights, who are now prating about the great services rendered by the Irish to the United States. We would not detract in the least from the credit due the former class, but we do say that they were the exceptions so far as the Irish race in the country was concerned. They had imbibed the spirit of Americanism and cast aside their race proclivities. They enlisted as Americans, fought as Americans, and not as Irlsbjnen, because the Irish were.Vnotla 1$.'.!, .They were, reserv ing themselves to free Ireland by way of Chicago. Bridgeport Independent Leader. Rome and the Republican Party. Nearly two weeks ago we sent out four letters to delegates to the Repub lican National Convention to men who were on the resolutions committee asking them for an explanation of the report that Archbishop Ireland and R. C. Kerens had "fixed" the platform in the interests of the papal church. We have received but one reply, as follows: , July 2, 1896. Eiitor of The Citizen: In reply to yours of the 25th June allow me to say: I was a member of the committee on resolutions la the Republican National Convention. The resolution to which you refer that op posing the granting of public funds to sectarian institutions was in the first draft of the Republican platform, but was finally omitted not, as some of the pape: s say, through any Influence of Thomas H. Carter, for Mr. Carter's in fluence was absolutely ml; but through the influence of R. C. Kerens, Edward Lauterbach, and several gentlemen who are known to be Protestants, but who were anxious not to antagonize the Roman Catholics. Mr. McKlnley was In no way responsible he saw and approved of the first draft, but was not consulted in regard to omitting the sec tarian funds clause. This was done as a matter of political caution; but it could have been prevented, probably, In one of two ways, viz.: If the patriotic orders had sent their best men to St. Louis. These orders were represented by men who are known to be cheap adventurers at least, these were the men (with the ex- ceptlon of Linton) who did the most of the talking, and they did it in such a blustering, bullying manner, as to dis gust those who otherwise would have favored them. I speak now of the lobbyists of the men who were not delegates or alternates. 2nd. It could have been prevented had your case been argued by one or two strong men on the resolutions com- mittee; but nothing was said in its favor it was allowed to go by default. The opposition put forth their best ef forts; your side did nothing. Any other measure would have suf- fered the same fate in the committee whether concerning tariff, coinage, or anything else if there had been only opposition and no defence. Planks have not only to be born, but to be nursed as well. Your sectarian appropriations plank was born, and then left as a foundling at the door of the committee without nurse, without care. Is it any wonder It died? However many men there may have been on the com mittee who favored It, none of them felt called upon to father it or sponsor it, as each bad all be could attend to outside of this. But here Is the fact: There were only four men on the whole committee who favored it. Not one man from the south, not one from New England, and but two from the central states, and tw3 from the Pacific, had any interest in the matter. These men are poli ticians, simply that and nothing more, and they care little about what they term "sumptuary legislation." Mr. McKlnley is not to blame; the party is not to blame; toe managers of the patriotic orders are to blame or rather, to be pitied for not having as their managers men competent to cope with such political tricksters as Kerens. You were outwitted that is all. Archbishop Ireland may have been concerned In the matter, but if so, we heard nothing about it. Kerens made a large majority believe such a plank would harm the party, and the minority was outvoted. If you desire to win the next time, begin at the caucuses and send the right men to the convention. It is use less to attempt this sort of work at the eleventh hour or, rather, twelfth hour. Personally, I wish the proposed plank had been Inserted; but you may take this as a fixed truth that platforms amount to nothing; they are made to be neglected and forgotten. If you elect patriotic men to the senate and house, your work will be successful; if you do not, of what avail would be a favorable platform? Remember that Republican politicians work on the same principle as do the storekeepers: "Protestants will trade with us any way; but we have to cater to the Ro man Catholics." Where can you do any better? With the Democrats? With the Populists? I think not. Do not allow treasonable men In your own ranks to split your organization by trick or trade. Stand by the party which has done so much for American ism in the recent congress. The above, as we have said, is the only reply we have received. The question arises: Who is to blame? If Allen oi Maine, or Lodge of Massachu setts, or Fessenden of Connecticut, voted to kill the patriotic plank re ferred to, will It help the matter to de feat McKlnley and throw the election into the hands of the Romanist party the Democrats? Would that help on the patriotic work? We confess that we are disgusted with politics and political parties, and we are perplexed as to the wise course to pursuo. We believe in McKlnley, for we are convinced that what our correspondent says Is true. He is an intelligent Protestant American. But some of his managers seem disposed to lose the substance in grasping at the shadow. They disgust three million American voters by their mean cater ing to a few hundred Irish Roman Catholics who may or may not vote their ticket. We await further developments Im portant information having been prom ised us. Boston Citizen. Illustrated the Manner. Archbishop Ireland, one of Rome's leading prelates in this country, in a recent speech directed against the American Protective Association, il lustrated the manner in which Rome is accustomed to ignore both history and the intelligence of the American peo ple by the following utterance: "The liberties, the Democracy, the spirit of progress, which are the glories of America, are the outcome of the deep est principles of the Catholic church. Liberty and progress came into the world with her." The intrinsic value of this may be seen by placing beside it this statement from Bancroft's His tory of the United States, Vol. V., page 295: "The British gained numerous re cruits from immigrants. Cultivated men of the Romish church gave hearty support to the cause of independence; but the great mass of its members, who were then but about one In seventy-five of the population of the United States and were chiefly newcomers in the middle states, followed the influence of the Jesuits, in whose hands the direc tion of the Catholics of the United States still remained, and who cher ished hatred of France for her share in the overthrow of their order. In Phila delphia Howe had been able to form a regiment oi Roman Catholics." This early opposition of the Catho lics to American independence reflects, of course, much less upon the char acter of the Catholic people than upon their condition of mental and moral subserviency to the will of their su periors, who were well versed In "the deepest principles of the Catholic church." The evil work of the papacy is not due to the character of the mass and Its adherents, but to the nature of Its principles. American Sentinel The Fallacy of Free and Un limited Coinage Fully Set Forth. The Silver Mm the Real MonomeUlhiU A I'Un te Enrich the Mine Owner Without Benefit to Others. As we have given space to free sil ver articles we shall be consistent and allow the other side to have a fair and impartial hearing. The first arti ole will be an address by Hon. John L. Webster of Omaha, taken from the Ktbraska State Journal of Oct. 29, 1895. The address was delivored at Nebraska City Oct. 27, and Is well worth read ing. The State Journal prefaced Mr. Webster's speech with this parapraph: Undoubtedly the best exposition of the silver question heard here this campaign was made in the address de livered at the Republican meeting last evening by Hon. John L. Webster of Omaha. In its clear, convincing loglo It Is worthy of place as a text-book on the finance Issue. The following em braces some of the points made by Mr, Webster: The free and unlimited coinage of silver in the ratio of 16 to 1 Is a de lusion and a snare. It Involves a fal lacy which has been threshed out in all civilized countries of the world years and years ago. Wherever It has been Investigated and put to trial In the commercial world It has been re pudiated. Judgment based on practi cal experience has repudiated and con demned it. There were skilled men In finance and In monetary matters when it was condemned in Europe. There were as wise men in finance and In monetary affairs when it was con demned in this country as there are to-day, The men who are advanolng the policy of the free and unlimited coinage of silver in the ratio of 16 to 1 In this campaign are not advocating a hew doctrlne.Taoither are they proph ets of greater wisdom than the proph ets of a century ago, whose prophecies failed. Viewed In the light of experience, there Is no more reason why we should place confidence in these advocates of silver than that we should place confi dence In the Donnelly theory that the works of Shakespeare were written by Bacon, or that the religion of the Mor mon church is the true religion of the world. Both Donnelly and Brigham Young had followers for a time, yet the good and settled sense of the country adheres to the idea that William Shakespeare and not Bacon was the author of that classical literature, and that the Bible and not the book of Mormons contains the doctrine of the true religion. Free silver men talk of gold and silver coinage of the constitution, but perhaps the majority of these men never read the provisions of the con stitution upon the subject of money. The constitution says nothing about either gold or silver. It says nothing about what shall be the ratio between gold and silver as money. It says nothing about the unlimited coinage of either metal. The constitution simply confers upon congress the power "to coin money" and to "regulate the value thereof." The question as to whether gold or sil ver shall be the money of the country and the regulation of the value of one to the other, and the quantity thereof to be coined, are matters left to regula tion by congress. This is, therefore, not a constitutional question. It is a question of expediency. The Nebraska champion of free sil ver says: "We believe in the unlim ited coinage of silver because we have an unlimited coinage of gold." He might as well say that, whereas, we have a limited coinage of silver we should hava a limited coinage of gold There would be as much argument in one statement as in the other. Neither statement argues anything or proves anything. This silver champion further says: "We believe in the treatment of gold and silver exactly alike." Why so? If his statement is logical, then whereas we have demonetized silver, as he claims, we should therefore demone tize gold. That would be treating gold and silver both alike. So we propound the query, does he believe in the de monetization of gold? We do not be lieve there is a free silver advocate who would have courage sufficient to advance such a doctrine. A mere statement of the case shows the fallacy of such arguments. It Is true that if a man brings gold to a mint to be coined, he Is not asked, where did you get this gold? The gold may have come from Australia, or from Mexico, or from Colorado, and yet be freely coined. Why? Because that gold, whether brought from any of the countries named has the same intrinsic value as a commodity whether coined or not coined. How is it with sliver? Just the reverse. Silver does not have the Intrinsic value as a commodity, that It Is de clared to have by the stamp put upon it at the mint. Silver men ask sixty cents for silver as a commodity that coined at the mint and stamped be comes a dollar, and then ask that It shall pass current as a dollar when Its bullion value la but sixty cents. A mere statement of the case shows that silver money would be depreciated money. It is an attempt to force upon the country two kinds of money of unequal value, and then it asks that the parity between the two metals shall be main tained. To maintain the parity of two metals as money which are of unequal value, is a problem which the history of finance has demonstrated cannot be solved, except to a limited degree. The most sanguine free silver mon admit the truth of the last statement, but undertake to avoid the effect of the statement by saying that the United States would not be flooded by an un limited amount of silver. They say that silver would not come from France for the reason that the French silver coin is worth three cents more than the American silver coin, and there fore that France could not afford to bring Its silver to America. There Is a fallacy in this statement. France does not have the free and unlimited coinage of silver, and has not had for many years, for the same reasons that induced this country to put a limit upon the amount of silver coined. Silver in France as a commodity has the same market value as silver as a commodity has in the United States. Let us state the converse of the propo sition. If silver In France has the in trinsic value of gold at the ratio of 16 to 1, why do not the silver mine owners take their silver to France and hava it ooined into French pieces,, and thus make It exchangeable for gold at Its value? It is simply because the French government knows as well as this gov ernment knows, It would be unwise to again permit the free and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 154 to 1. The result Is self-evident that the surplus silver of France as an element of merchandise would come to the United States to be coined as money, with the hope of having its exchange able value Increased nearly 100 per cent. If the coining of silver metal Into dollars would eo enhance its real value as to put it on a parity with gold, why is not the Mexican dollar ex changeable for gold. Why do not all the sliver mine owners take their sil ver to Mexico and have It coined. Mexico has the free and unlimited coinage of silver, and yet the truth is that in that country the silver dollar is not exchangeable at par with the gold dollar. When the Mexican silver dol lar is brought Into the United States, its exchangeable value is about fifty cents. The Mexican gold dollar, how ever, is exchangeable at par with the gold dollar of the United States or the gold money of Europe. All this is be cause gold has an intrinsic value, equal to its coined value while silver has not. In further answer to the question, where would silver come from, to cre ate a surplus amount, we answer that It would come from every country where sliver is mined. All Australian silver would come to our mints. All Mexican silver would come to Ameri can mints. All the silver from all the countries of the world would come to the American mints. If the theory of silver men be true, that the free and unlimited coinage of silver would so enhance its minted value above its commodity value, so as to put it on a parity with gold, we are thus brought to this startling proposition: There Is 160,000,000 ounces of silver mined every year. That silver has a commodity value of $125,000,000, and its coined value according to the ratio now ex Istlng in the United States would be $22.5,000,000. There would be a clear profit to the owners of commodity sil ver of $J 00,000,000 per year. Silver men are in the habit of say ing that they are bimetalllsts. Is it not a self-evident proposition that with the annual coinage of so ch silver, at so great a depreciated valua tion, the same could not be exchanged for gold? The owners of silver could not go to the United States treasury and exchange It for gold, for there is not sufficient gold to make the ex change. The moment that the ex change ofygoldj for silver cannot be made on account of the groat differ ence in the values of the two kinds of money, the silver being worth but sixty cents, while the gold Is worth loO oenta, the owner of the gold dollar will refuse to exchange for the silver dollar. Gold would be at a premium, just as la the days after the war, when we bad a larger quantity of green backs than could be exchanged for gold, gold was at a premium; It was hoarded or drawn out of circulation and paper currency becamo the money of the day. Thus it-would be with the free and unlimited coinage of silver. Gold would dlsappaar, and silver would be the only money of the country. We would have but one klnda-of mutal money in use and that would be silver. The result of this is that free sliver mon would bo mono-metalllsts. . A financial panla would oome the moment the free and unlimited coinage of silver produced an undue propor tion in the quantities of the two kinds of money. Gold would go out of circu lation and to that extent the amount of the circulating medium would be turned from commercial trade. Yet that is not all of this proposition. There are hundreds of millions of American securities held abroad. There are county bonds, school bonds, city bonds, railway bonds, and 'others that we might mention, that have been purchased by the capitalists of Europe, and by such sale wo havo bad the bone fit of all the money that has been sent to this country to purchase these bonds. These purchases were made upon the faith that they would be paid in money worth one hundred cents on the dollar. Capital is timid. It can not be regulated by law. Every owner of capital has the right to do with it as he pleases. His money is his own. When the threat comes, that those se curities are liable to be paid in de preciated money, the holders of those securities would demand that they be paid at the earliest day. Gold will travel out of the country to pay these securities. America will be called Dpon to pay its debt to Europe. There Is scarcely a city but would bo found with an empty treasury, nor a railroad company that would not be forced Into the hands of a receiver under fore closure proceedings. It needs no argu- meut or lengthy discussion to show that panlo would spread itself over the United States, such as this country has never experienced before. The evils that my friend, Mr. Bryan, so often undertakes to predict, using a sentence of Secretary Carlisle as a text, has not come from what he calls the demoneti zation of sliver, but it will surely come from the free and unlimited coinage of silver. Mr. Bryan ridicules the suggestion frequently made that the Rothschilds might buy up the silver of Europe and bring it to American mints to be coined into money, and thus make a hundred per cent profit on the investment, by saying: "If he wants to give his silver dollar for a gold dollar, he must find somebody who Is willing to give his gold dollar for a silver dollar. He cannot compel the giving or exchange of a gold dollar for some other." That admits the whole proposition. If I had a hundred silver dollars of depreciated value could I compel my neighbor to give me one hundred gold dollars In exchange therefor? It also follows that the man who had the gold would refuse to make the exchange. All this means that silver would become the circulating medium and gold would be retired. Mr. Bryan further argues that the Rothschilds could not use the Ameri can coined silver dollar in buying American merchandise, because "he could only buy with his silver dollar from those who were unwilling to ac cept his silver dollar for goods" "You can trust to the intelligence of the American not to allow the cheap dollar to be palmed off on him." Well, If the silver dollar is a cheap dollar, so that it cannot be palmed off for American goods or for American labor, then what are they going to do with the American dollar? If the sil ver dollar is to be so cheap that it will not buy goods, and will not pay for labor, what is it good for? If the Rothschilds cannot buy goods or cannot buy labor with the silver dol lar, how Is the American laborer or the American merchant to buy goods with his silver dollar? If the silver dollar is to be so cheap that it cannot be used what do we want with it? If the Rothschilds cannot buy goods with the American 6ilver dollar, then the New York merchant cannot buy goods in Europe with his sliver dollar. The Omaha merchant cannot buy New York goods with his silver dollar. The sliver dollar must have some value some exchangeable value if it is in the pocket of the Roths childs, or in the pocket of the Kountzes, Continued on page 4.