understanding of sound measures of public policy, they take a course that will commend the approval of every honest, intelligent person. Only in this way can the true good of all the people be promoted. An honest, intelligent plutocracy is the only means by which the interests of an ignorant democracy can be safeguarded and correctly served.

THE MAN AND THE DOLLAR.

The effort to win popularity by holding the man above the dollar will fail with all who can see things in their true relation and can think clearly and accurately about them. No one values money more than life. No one wants a moneyless life. Those who proclaim with great unction their great love for man, as a means of winning support for their cause, hold certain theories of public policy which, if enacted, they profess to believe will make the great mass of men better off, will help them to secure more dollars. All their rhetoric about the man and the dollar simply means they want things so ordered that the man can have more dollars. Should they deny this, should they avow that it is not their purpose to put money into the pockets of their followers, they would soon be without followers, because the rank and file of all parties know what they want. They want more money and they support the policies advocated by their leaders because they believe they are to be benefited by doing so.

The wages of men and of money infallibly test the soundness of public policy. The men who obtain money by working for it are the millions. Those who obtain money by securing pay for its use are the millionaires. Those who intelligently serve men so order conditions that the wages of men rise, while the wages of money fall. Such a condition cannot exist where there is instability in monetary affairs, resulting from unsound public policy regarding the unit of value, and the kind of money in which obligations may be paid.

The Republican party is denounced for having established a gold standard and maintained a protective tariff. It is called the party of the money power. This is true, and it has used its power to raise the wages of men and to decrease the wages of money. An article from the Hartford Courant, under the title of "Wages of Men and of Money," shows that workingmen are daily experiencing the fact that they are getting more money than they once did, while bondholders are also experiencing the reverse fact and find it impossible to get even half as much as they once did. Is not this doing more for men as men than for dollars as dollars?

A man who has no money, so long as he is in that condition, is as well off under the administration of one party as of the other. He is at financial zero. It makes no difference to him what kind of money others have, paper, silver or gold, so long as he has

none. Having none, if he wants none, he might as well be a 16 to I popocrat as a gold Democrat. He has no need to cross over the line from one party to the other. A story taken from the Cleveland Leader illustrates this point:

NO NEED TO CROSS.

Booker T. Washington told the following story of a member of the "po'h white trash" who endeavored to cross a stream by means of a ferry owned by a black man.

"Uncle Mose," said the white man, "I want to cross, but I hain't got no money."

Uncle Mose scratched his head. "Doan' you got no money 't all?" he queried.

"No," said the wayfaring stranger, "I haven't a cent.'

"But it don' cost you but three cents," insisted Uncle Mose, "to cross de ferry."

"I know," said the white man, "but I haven't got the three cents."

Uncle Mose was in a quandary. "Boss," he said, "I done tole you what. 'Er man what's got no three cents am jes' ez well off on dis side er de river as on de odder."

A THRIFTY MONEY LENDER.

In 1870 a depositor put $440 in a savings bank. In 1875 $450 was deposited. In 1888 $100 was withdrawn. The total deposit was $890, less $100, leaving $790 of principal. When this account was written up for June 30, 1900, the accumulated dividends amounted to $1,700, making the amount now due the depositor, $2,690. This is a good example of what thrift and a stable currency can accomplish. The owner of this bank book can now draw this money in gold or in currency that he can exchange at par for gold. If the gold standard is overthrown and the monetary system is based on the free coinage of silver this depositor will be paid in silver having less than one-half the purchasing power of the gold he may now have. If he has other money due him his debtor would also pay him in silver. That is the reason originally given for advocating the free coinage of silver. It was to have a cheaper dollar to pay debts with. Bankers would pay their debts to depositors in silver dollars and gain the difference in value between silver and gold. Farmers, for whose benefit cheap dollars were originally demanded, would be the class who would secure the least benefit from the scheme. The purchasing power of the people would be reduced because the money they would receive for wages or their products would be cheapened to less than half the present value of money. When this occurs buyers of

farm products will resist the raising of prices while making payments in the cheap money they have received. Is it not better to protect the money in savings banks and thus encourage all who wish to become thrifty money lenders, than to attempt to secure greater prosperity than we now have by taking the risk of the greatest panic ever known?

MONEY PLENTY AND CHEAP.

If representations of free silver advocates were true, that gold bugs wanted to establish a single gold standard, so they could make money scarce and dear and thus squeeze debtors into paying debts with money having a greater purchasing power than the money they borrowed, the gold bugs have made a most lamentable failure. Instead of appreciating, money in the United States has steadily tended to become more abundant and to fall in value ever since Bryan's defeat in 1896. Then we were a debtor nation; now we are a creditor nation and have this year loaned money to foreign countries at higher rates of interest than some of our municipal governments pay on their bonds. New York and St. Paul have obtained, and New Orleans will do so, if Bryan is again defeated, all the money they have offered their securities for at 3 per cent. These cities represent different sections of the country. Their experience shows that money is cheaper and more abundant throughout the country than it has ever before been.