tariff of 1861, still in force, and which Mr. Cleveland's administration is endeavoring to destroy, introduced a prosperous era after the tremendous convulsion of 1857, which was caused by the perfidiously enacted tariff of 1846.

Third, that there never has been a time since Mr. Calhoun forced the Democratic party to submit to the control of Southern leaders, as it is now ingloriously submitting to-day, that it did not, if in power, demand the repeal and destruction of a protective tariff, even when its efficient and beneficial action upon all the interests of the country was established and demonstrated beyond doubt or cavil. Mr. Calhoun forced the Democratic party in 1833 to break down the tariffs of 1824 and 1828, for which three Democratic Presidents had voted. Mr. Polk forced the Democratic party, even though it stained its political record with bad faith, to break down the tariff of 1842, which had already in its four years existence renewed the hopes of the country after a long era of depression. And now Mr. Cleveland, true to the precedents and instincts of his party, seeks to break down the present protective tariff at the risk of disturbing the industries of a continent, and to commit the American people once more to the old experiment of Democratic free trade or revenue tariff, with its inevitable disaster to the material interests of the country, and in no small degree to that mighty host who earn their day's bread by their day's work, and to whom good wages bring happiness and low wages bring misery.

The first political speech which I delivered after more than a year's absence in Europe was in this great city, last month. I then warned the laboring men of the United States that a protective tariff was their shield and bulwark; that they could break it down with their votes, or they could sustain it with their votes. I repeat that admonition in the same great city, here and now. If the great army of wage-workers in this country will not protect themselves, there is no other power that can protect them. A century's experience of the tariff should be their warning and their guide.

It is for you to say if a century's experience should be a light to your feet. It should teach you the great and useful lesson that if you do not maintain your own ground

no one else will maintain it for you. The power is in your hands. It may be wielded for your destruction, or it may be wielded for your protection and for your safety. [Loud and prolonged cheering, and waving of hats, flags, and canes.]

RICHARD PARKS
PARKS BLAND

FREE SILVER

[Richard Parks Bland, an American congressman, noted for his views on the silver question, was born in Kentucky in 1835. He worked on a farm in early life, saving enough money to obtain an academic education. Then he studied law and finally settled in Missouri, from which state he was sent to Congress in 1873. He was regularly reelected until his death in 1899, with the exception of one defeat. The principal event of his congressional career was the introduction into Congress of the "Bland Bill," providing that the national government purchase silver bullion sufficient to coin at least $2,000,ooo monthly, the coins themselves being legal tender. Bland delivered earnest speeches both in and out of Congress in support of his views, the tenor of which gained him his popular name of Silver Dick." He died in 1899. The characteristic speech here given was delivered in the House of Representatives in 1890, and may be regarded as a clear exposition of his views on silver.]

MR.

R. CONGER assumed that the great pressure for free coinage in this country comes only from the owners of silver mines, and he has alluded to the St. Louis convention and the efforts there made to educate the minds of the people of this country on the silver question. As for the lobby of which he speaks I know nothing about it. I have not seen it myself, and I have never heard of it, unless he applies that term to gentlemen who have printed documents on this subject, who have addressed the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures upon the subject, and who have adopted every means within their power to give us information upon this very important question. In that way, and to that extent, I suppose we are always beset by "lobbyists." Indeed, in that sense we might be called lobbyists ourselves—if such a term could be applied to gentlemen on this floor-because it is our duty to give each other all the information that we have upon subjects of

legislation, and to obtain information from all legitimate quarters.

My friend has also alluded to a silver "pool" and silver speculation. Mr. Speaker, there is but one way to prevent speculation in silver bullion-the same sort of speculation as you have in wheat, the same sort of speculation as you have in corn, the same sort of speculation as you have in iron and steel, and in other products. There is, I say, but one way to prevent it, and that is to give it an unlimited coinage at the mints of this country. In that way you establish for silver, as you have established for gold, a price as money which will always fix the value of the bullion at the mints, and beyond that price it cannot go, unless other countries should desire to pay a higher price for it. Any legislation that restricts the coinage of silver offers an opportunity for speculation, and that was the difficulty with the legislation of 1878, to which my colleague, the chairman of the committee, has referred. At that time it was contended that silver was depreciated, and that therefore it ought not to have the privileges of the mints of the government. The House at that time passed a free coinage bill, pure and simple. It sent that bill to the Senate. There it was amended so as to provide for the coinage of not less than $2,000,000 worth of bullion per month, and not more than $4,000,000 worth.

That was the great mistake made when this question was up for solution in 1878. There is no question in my mind that had the Congress of the United States at that time done its duty with regard to this subject, and opened the mints to the unlimited coinage of silver, it would have settled the silver question, and settled it satisfactorily to the people of this country, and we should have no such question to deal with to-day. But gentlemen contended then, as they contend now, that gold was the only proper measure of value, that gold was the only safe coin, that gold was to dominate the silver question, and that silver as a standard of value would play no part in our coinage system or in our currency system. First, it was resolved that gold, and gold alone, was the dollar, the measure of value, and because silver bullion, after having been denied the privilege of free coinage, is not worth as much as gold,

which has that privilege, for that reason it is contended that silver ought not to be coined, but should be left to be a mere object of speculation. What has been the consequence? Gentlemen who live in the great Northwestern and Western states have been the sufferers. The cry for gold has been made by Eastern capitalists and bondholders for the purpose of collecting from the taxpayers of this country enormous sums of money in excess of what the laws of the country have promised them, and in excess of what justice and right would dictate.

How is this and why is it? They say that if we coin silver here, this country will be supplied with silver circulation to such an extent that our gold will leave us and we shall have nothing but silver as our currency. What of it? Mr. Speaker, even had that occurred in 1878, and we had been practically upon a silver basis—that is, had coined silver almost exclusively, and coined but little gold-what would have been the effect upon the products of the agricultural people of this country? Why, sir, we know that the moment we resumed specie payments and gave but a limited use for silver, we compelled a flow of gold from European countries to this country, depriving them to that extent of a circulating medium. We have brought here since that time gold to the amount of $400,000,000 or $500,000,000. What effect has that had upon prices in this country? We send abroad our cotton, our wheat, our breadstuffs; they constitute our chief articles of export to foreign countries. Now, is it not to the interests of the agriculturists of this country to have high prices in foreign countries for their products? Certainly it is, because it is the price obtained abroad that fixes the price at home. we had better prices abroad for the products of the farms of this country, there would be better prices at home and a larger surplus to export. How has that prevented higher prices, or, in other words, how has it operated to continue in this country lower prices, especially for all farm products? It has been done in the way I have indicated. We have been drawing upon the stock of circulating gold of European countries. We have to that extent decreased their circulating medium and lowered prices there-lowered prices in the very markets where it is our interest to in

If