* J
W 4v * *
'the Conservative.
lot of petty pawnshops which distrust
each other and are particularly dis
trusted by the government which created
them.
This government , "by and for the
people , " commends to the people these
banks as "nation-
IlluHtration. , , , _ , . .
al. " It authorizes
these banks to receive deposits from the
people , but at the same time the govern
ment itself refuses to deposit a dollar in
the banks of its own creation except
upon the pledge of government bonds.
That has been going on for more than
thirty years ; in fact , ever since the time
when , during our civil war , Secretary
Chase devised these national banks as a
scheme or instrumentality for selling
government bonds. How can any
student of finance look these facts in the
face without feeling a mingled desire to
laugh and to weep ?
BKYANAKCHY.
In a recent speech the advocate of sil
ver maggots said :
"Those who studied the money ques
tion in 1896 foresaw the danger threat
ened by the gold standard , and pointed
out that its permanent establishment
would involve us in every financial dis
turbance occurring in Europe , but the
bankers were , for the most part , blind
to the warning.
"What do we see now ? Notwith
standing the increased production ol
gold , a few victories won by the Boers
in South Africa have alarmed the same
bankers , and they are now fearing a
panic unless England is immediately
successful. Their financial interest in
England's triumph is so great that
many of them have silenced their sym
pathy for a struggling republic , auc
hoping for the extension of the author
ity of a queen.
"If such agitation results from a war
between England and a little republic
what must we expect if war ever breaks
out between two gold standard coun
tries of the first class ? Without finaii
cial independence this nation cannot be
independent either in its foreign or its
domestic policy , and yet the republi
can party is even now preparing to
chain America like a captive to En
rope's gold chariot. "
If there ever was a man before the
American public who persistently
demonstrated his ignorance , partisan
bias and total uufitness for a position of
public trust , that man is William J
Bryan. He never really argues. He
has not even the logical acumen of a
lawyer conscious of the weakness of his
case. His constant appeal is to preju
dice and partisan ignorance. MoEinley
is much like Bryan in some ways , bu
has saving common sense in others.
When Bryan says that "the financial
interest in England's triumph is so grea
that many of them ( bankers and gold
bugs ) have silenced their sympathy fo
a struggling republic and are hoping fo
the ascendency of the authority of a
queen , " he simply makes a demagogic
appeal to the hatred of England still
ateut in the minds of the ignorant and
> rojudiced among the people. No
person of any intelligence thinks that
; he financiers of America are giving one
; hought as to whether the government
of South Africa is a Boer republic , with
a president , or is to bo part of a republi
can monarchy as England is. Those
men are simply thinking which would
) e better for themselves , the continuance
of Boer government in South Africa or
; he assumption of that government by
England ? That is , if they think at allen
on the matter , which is doubtful. The
probability is that they are simply
watching the individual movements of
combatants as 'they effect the daily
conditions of the financial world. Out
side their immediate business interests ,
and that not so very general , our finan
ciers are not very long-headed men.
But there is another and still more
interesting side of the question which
Mr. Bryan either ignores or is entirely
ignorant of. That question is not as to
whether Boerdom is a republic and
Great Britain a republican government
under a queen , but whether the history
of the Angles , the world over , has not
invariably been far more to the advance
ment of commerce and liberty , than
that of the Dutch , including the Boers ?
England is not a monarchy , properly
speaking. There is as much aud as
fair if not more representation of the
people in England as here aye , more ,
for when the government cannot main
tain itself , it dissolves itself and appeals
to the people , and accepts the verdict.
There is more popular power in elec
tion , more personal liberty of choice in
England than in the United States under
its machine despotism.
Again , to come back to our much
maligned bankers. As said before , if
they think at all , they must think as to
what is best for themselves. The bank
ers are representative men. In a certain
sense they represent , by the process of
natural selection , the financial interests
of the country. If they side with Eng
land in this matter , it is not a question
of form of government ; it is not the
gold question itself , it is that English
victory means an "extension" of the
business facilities of the world , "free
trade and no favor" in Boerdom , as else
where in the British colonies. Is there
a sane American who dooss not know
that the "extension" of English in
fluence over the word has been more to
the development of the world's business
prosperity than that of all other nations
combined ?
He who sympathizes with the Boers is
an enemy to himself and his country's
prosperity , aye , to the real welfare of
the race.
Financial Independence.
Mr. Bryan's cry for financial indepen
dence is another appeal to partisan
ignorance and American bigheadedness.
It is a cry for the impossible. As the
richest man in America is not financially
independent of the balance of us "com- ,
mon people , " his wealth and prosperity ( | <
being dependent on the wealth and'
prosperity of us "insiguiflcauts , " so no
nation in the world is , or can be , finan
cially independent of the balance of the
world under existing and future condi
tions of commerce.
To be financially independent does not
mean either the gold standard , 16 to 1
or any other system of money alone. In
one sense that is the smallest part of it ,
though undoubtedly narrow-minded
financiers think it the biggest. Finan
cial independence means business inde
pendence. It means no commercial
relations whatever ; no selling of wheat ,
grains , pork , beef , railroad supplies , \
cotton , or manufactures of any kind j
too ; and no purchase of anything from |
other nations. That is the kind of 1
liberty and independence Mr. Bryan
advocates. Are the American people
ready to follow that kind of a mad man
into the slough of commercial anarchy ?
FRANK S. BILLINGS.
Sharon , Mass.
"HEAVEN HELPTHE NATIVES. "
When Senator Beveridge was so
naively setting up his lofty official stand
ard of qualifications for proconsuls and
prietors in the Philippines it is not
strange that Senator Hoar involuntarily
turned to the seats of Senators Hanua
aud Platt. The Massachusetts senator
in listening to this description of an
official Utopia in our eastern archipelago
probably asked himself whether , after
a hard-fought campaign , Chairman
Hanua would busy himself in recom
mending talented administrators and
philanthropists for official posts in the
Philippines , if such could be secured.
Similar places under the home govern
ment are , under the spoils policy which
prevails in spite of civil-service reform ,
the rewards of partisan activity ; and
they go to the most deserving political
workers. We know too well what kind
of recommendations for guardians of
the simple-minded Filipinos would
emanate from the Pennsylvania machine.
Heaven help the natives if any of the
municipal spoilsmen should be sent out
to administer their affairs and teach
them the methods of self-government !
Philadelphia Record ( Dam. ) .
A YOUNG ATTItA OUT OF THE WEST.
It is Mr. Beveridge's opinion that
"blind indeed is he who sees not the
baud of God in events so vast , so har
monious , so benign. " It is our opinion
that Mr. Beveridge talks like a young
Attila come out of the west , and that if
his Americanism is now the true brand ,
then indeed is the republic no more.
Springfield ( Mass. ) Republican ( Ind. ) .
