f Vf",F1-v Mpr .
K r,
'AUGUST 18, 1905
The Commoner.
CRITICISING
A
It is now In order for Senator Chauncey M.
Depew to call Senator Thomas M. Patterson to
account for a breach of senatorial courtesy, an
attack upon the defenders of "national honor,"
and conduct generally unbecoming one who, pre
tending to be patriotic, dares to criticise the
methods and question the motives of those hold
ing high position in the exclusively patriotic
class
The Denver News, edited by Senator Patter
son, prints an interesting editorial entitled
"Which of These Two?" Senator Patterson com
pares the offenses charged against Mitchell with
the offenses charged against Depew. While not
in the least excusing Mitchell, Senator Patter
son says that ho has been"an exponent of his
own views, sycophant to no power, rugged in the
advacacy of right as he has been given to see
the right," although "at the age of three score
and ten he feels the heavy hand of the law for
violating a statute prohibiting his action as an
attorney in the departments." Senator Patter
son says that Senator Mitchell has been "proof
against all temptations to betray or desert his
convictions (and they were many), with a con
stituency largely hostile to his own opinions, he
abated neither jot nor tittle of his views nor of
their full and constant expression, but, true to
himself, stood by his colors and risked retire
ment for what he believed to be the interests
and welfare of the nation. Surrounded by oppo
nents of his own political faith in Washington
and at home, he always fought the good fight,
and, though he failed in his purposes, he main
tained the confidence and, therefore, the support
o" his constituency. In the recent crusade against
some of the despoilers of the public domain the
senator was accused of receiving a fee of $2,000
in consideration of services to be rendered by
him in the departments for securing and expedit
ing the acquisition of title to certain timber
lands. Qn this charge, and in the face of a
long and honorable public record, he has recently
been convicted; whether Justly or unjustly re
mains to bo determined on appeal."
Then Senator Patterson compares Mitchell's
record with that of Dopew, of whom ho says:
"During his long career ho never had a
thought beyond or above the interest of his
adopted family. He never expressod a senti
ment, however lofty, uuless it would sorvo the
house of his allegiance. A congressional investi
gation held years ago exposed some of his meth
ods, and but for the immenso Influence of the
Vanderbilts would have beached and stranded
him. In the strenuous times between 1893 and
1900 he declaimed eloquently against the social
ism of the income tax, the Immoral tendency of
bimetalism, denouncing froe coinage as a crime
against honor and patriotism and its advocates
as degenorato Americans. His classic disappro
val of western heresies and communistic ten
dencies has long gladdened the hearts of the
elect and given reassurance to the magnates of
eastern finance and monpoly now so seemingly
secure in the possession and control oC every
department of public affairs in state and nation.
Even his opporonts have at times been deluded
by his ostentatious phariseelsm into the notion
that as senator he had severed the Vanderbllt
cable and in his old age was guiding his craft,
on his own account away from the tides -and
shoals of other flays. But the ways of youth and
life's noontide are nearly always those of life's
declines. The Equitable earthquake has opened
many sepulchers and exposed many careers. The
'national honor' so dear to many of the notables
of New York's elect seems to be the only sort
of honor some of them ever loved or ever knew.
Personal and business Integrity, the sole and
enduring basis of public morality, seems to have
fled, if not 'to bruitish beasts at least to a
lower stratum of Now York citizenship."
Senator Patterson concludes his terrific ar
raignment in this way: "Senator Depew, a man
of the classes, devoted for more than half a cen-
PATRIOT
tury to the welfare of hugo private interests,
aristocrat of aristocrats, unlawfully identified
himself with tho directorate of a groat insuronco
company Unit tho woight of his name might
recommend it to tho multitude, nccopted royal
rotninors from Its treasury without return, Is
guilty of a diversion of its funds to his own ac
count thinly disguised undor a corporato name.
Tho lifelong rcclplont of favors bestowed by tho
royal hand of prlvlloge, accustomed not only to
see but to advise tho disregard of legal and con
stitutional restraints by powerful combinations,
may wince under tho public gazo, hut theso same
Influences will shield him from the public prose
cutor. No Indictment for him, but tho forum of
tho senate withal, for Js hp not needed to help
stem the tide of communistic rate regulative
legislation that an impulslvo president has rashly
recommended? What are tho interests of policy
holders or the demands of Justlco In tho face of
such a peril? The nation' needs Chauncey, and
tho man who would Interfere with him now would
lift his hand against 'his country und his coun
try's honor.' So next winter tho New York sen
ator will give his great talents to 'his country's
cause, whilo Senator Mitcholl, In the solitude of
his committee rooms, will await the action of the
supremo court upon his appeal.
"Guilt should not be condoned. It is ropul
sive in all its variant forms, and he who tries
to distinguish, that he may condemn or palliate,
renders n sorvlco of questionable benefit. Yet
I can not but conclude that if tho averago citizen
of the day, cognizant of the careers and tho con
duct of both, were compelled to choose between
the senator from New York and the sonator from
Oregon, as an object either of .sympathy or of
approval, hard though tho task might bo, he
would not stand with Depew upon the senate
floor, but plnco his arm around the drooping
shoulders of Mitchell and walk beside him with
slorr and silent stride out into the marble vesti
bule beyond."
ARE OUR DOLLARS "DOLLARS EVERYWHERE"?
Mr. Orwell C. Riddle, of Columbus, Ohio,
has made an interesting compilation of Associa
ted Press dispatches relating to money. These
dispatches and Mr. Riddle's letter accompanying
them, should be carefully read by every Com
moner reader. Mr. Riddle says:
"During the campaign of 189G there was much
gusto in the papers that wanted bimetallism by
international agreement about 'a dollar that is a
dollar the world over,' meaning that our gold
dollar was worth a dollar the world over and
that our silver dollar was not. Of course, we
answered them by showing that our metallic
money at home is the creature of our laws, but
away from home It is merely bullion, and that in
the Bank of England, the fountain of financial
wisdom to the plutocrat, even our gold coins were
weighed instead of counted. That was true ten
years ago.
"Enclosed you will find market quotations of
various dates which I cut from the regular daily
Associated Press reports showing how our cold
eagles are on the market in London with a
fluctuating vallue.
"At a dinner a year ago attended by Dr.
Reemelin, of Cincinnati, and several other mem
bers of the old Bimetallic club at Cincinnati,
which was given by my cousin, Lewis Steutz
at his home here and at which Mr. Lentz and
myself were guests, I put the poser to Dr.
Reemelin as to why our gold dollars that
are 'dollars the world over' should be quot
ed on the market in .London at fluctuating
values, instead of being just dollars
or eagles. His answer very naturally was that
the Americans abroad wanting our gold money
for returning home or exchange elsewhere
brought this about, but he would not go into the
deeper mystery of our money having abroad a
market value different from Its stamp value, coin
ago value, legal value, or whatever you chc:e
to call It, at hr"
"I do not know how to explain my ideas about
this financial phenomenon of 'a dollar worth a
dollar the world over' being, worth more away
from home than at home, or being fluctuating in
value abroad and rigid at home, ovon that 'sacred
gold dollar so dear to the hearts of the republican
campaign howlers in 1896. If it were tho silver
dollar the mystery would be' discernible and
easily solved.
"And here's the rub: If our gold dollars are
marketable at fluctuating values In London, what
is to keep our gold eagles above par, or what
is to prevent their going below par at least to
the extent of expense for recoinage into foreign
coins? And if our silver dollars were to be put
on the market In Londan what would regulate
the price, bullion value or coinage value? If
our silver dollars were to be put on the market
In London at the' bullion value what would be the
effect on the value of our silver dollars In New
York?
"You will see by enclosed quotations of the
money market in New York as carried by Asso
ciated Press reports, that Mexican dollars are
quoted there at bullion, values. What is to pre
vent London doing the same thing to our silver
dollars? And once London were to do that would
it not knock Into a cocked hat the silly conten
tion of goldbugs that our dollars are dollars every
where because predicated on a gold standard,
especially when our gold money Itself is sub
jected to variation? I sincerely believe that tho
British money changers do not juggle our silver
dollars as the Mexicans are at New York simply
to save the New York money changers from ex
posure and ridicule about our 'sacred' gold stand
ard. I have wondered, too, why the goldbugs
do not attack the silver dollar in this way per
haps they may do so In time, say after they get
a bill passed for recoinage of silver dollars into
subsidiary coins.
"I admit all that may be said about desira
bility of obtaining our own coins when abroad
for exchange, but I believe that the philosophy
of finance goes deeper than that. I believe that
if any of our coins can be put on the market In
foreign countries and sold above par they can
be sold below par If any occasion for financial
juggling, such as war or panic, should arise to
give fictitious qualms. And if our coins can be
sold at speculative values in Europe then is our
dollar not 'a dollar that is a dollar the world
over,' whether It be silver or gold?
"And does not all this go further to prove
that we should take the whole question into our
own hands and fix our financial system and value
of various coins without iho nfd or consent of any
other nation, especially when we see that undor
tho 'sacred' gold standard even our most 'sacred'
gold coins arc juggled by the money changers of
Lombard and Threadneedle streets? We ought
to make it impossible for anybody to speculate In
our money by making It unprofitable to do so.
"I fear I have failed to make myself clear
but I believe a great principle is involved here,
and have tried to unfold it."
GOLD EAGLES
First among the enclosures arc quotations of
gold eagles at London and Mexican silver dol
lars at New York showing fluctuations. These
dispatches follow: OJ
London, Jan. 1C Bar gold, 77s, 9d; Amer
ican eagles, 70s, 4d. ,( V)
London, Jan. 19. Bar gold, 77s, lOd. Amer
ican eagles, 70s, 5d.
London, Jan. 23. Bar gold, 77a, 10 d. Amer
ican eagles, 75s, 5d.
London, Feb. C. Bar gold, 77s, 9Vid; Amer
ican eagles, 76s, 4d.
London, April 17. Bar gold, 77s, 9,id. Amer
ican eagles, 76s, 4d.
London, May 1. -Bar gold, 77s, 9d. Amer
ican eagles, 76s, 4d.
London, June 2G. Bar gold 77s, 0d. Amer
ican eagles 76s, 4d.
Berlin, June 26. Exchange on London 20
marks, 47 pigs for checks.
London, June 27. Bar gold 77s, 9d. Amer
ican eagles 76s, 4d.
London, June 29. Bar gold, 77s, 9d. Amer
ican eagles 76s, 4d.
Londan, June 30. Bar gold 77s, 9d. Ameri
can eagles, 76s 4d.
Berlin, June 30. Exchange on London, 20
marks 46.
London, July 3. Bar gold, 77s 9d. Amer
ican eagles, 76s, 4d.
MEXICAN DOLLARS,
New York, Feb. 14. Mexican dollars 47.
New York, Feb. 21. Mexican dollars 47'.
New York, Feb. 25. Mexican dollars 47.
New York, March 4. Mexican dollars 46,
, New York, July 25. Mexican dollars 45.
io i' iotr ' f :!'"' ' !...
3J..Ajrr - -'
i.idK dfcWj, .
-jifJMiL2LijiJtf. i.i.