People's Pilot, Volume 3, Number 30, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 12 January 1894 — HOT SHOT. [ARTICLE]

HOT SHOT.

A Southern Democratic Paper Has Something to Say on the Silver Question in General and the Attitude of Senator Voorhees in Particular. It is said that the brethern who followed the lead of Mr. Voorhees in his fight against the continued purchase of silver have been struck dumb by his measure which he has just introduced, providing for the renewal of government purchase of silver. They do not know what to make of it. They retire to the cloakrooms and scratch their heads on the bald spots, or stand in the hotel lobbies and chew this new and surprising financial cud. But scratch and chew as they will, they cannot solve the riddle. What does Mr. Voorhees mean? What is his motive? What does he propose to accomplish? Does he introduce this new financial scheme as a Hoosier solution of the financial problem, as a personal measure or as a democratic plan. These are the questions that are bothering the brand new as well as the musty and fussy statesmen around Washington, and they find no answer. They cannot make head or tail of the proposition to revive again the scheme of silver purchases which Mr. Voorhees grew haggard in opposing. The Indiana senator very frankly says that it is not an administration measure, though that fact was patent from the first On the other hand it is very far from being a democratic measure. We judge that Senator Voorhees learned on his return to Indiana, after the adjournment of the extra session, that the people of his state were not enthusiastic over the record be had made as. the right bower of John Sherman in the movement that resulted in the final demonetization of silver. We imagine he found that his programme of coining silver free on the stump and smashing it by means of legislation did not commend itself to the enthusi-

asm of the rock-ribbed and unterrified democracy that has been holding the fort in the Hoosier state. Consequently he felt it incumbent on him to demonstrate to his constituents that he is not only in favor of free coinage of silver on the stump but also in favor of reviving the purchasing clause of the Sherman act that he joined the enemies of silver in destroying. But while Mr. Voorhees was trying to get back to a position from which he had permitted himself to be coaxed or driven, why did he fail to remember the democratic platfarm, which is still the constitution and the law of the party? What is the matter with it that democrats like Mr. Voorhees should run away from it? The people were not afraid of it during the campaign; why should the politicians who are engaged in the business of legislation endeavor to flee from it now that the people have indorsed it. Have they suddenly found that the platform is unmixed folly, or have they discovered that the people who voted for it are fools?

If Mr. Voorhees desired to identify himself with a measure that would meet the expectations of the people and benefit the country, why did he not embody in a bill the plain and simple pledge of the platform, wherein the party solemnly commits itself to the use of both gold and silver as the standard money of the country without discrimination against either metal at the mints or in the law? On the other hand, why should Mr Voorhees, unless he is engagefi in furthering a political sham and fraud, attach his name to a proposition which he himself denounced a short while ago as neither wise nor democratic, and which is as far removed from the policy of his party as the financial views of John Sherman?

Mr. Voorhees knows, or he certainly ought to know, that democratic opposition to the repeal of the Sherman law had no foundation in » desire to continue the purchase of silver bullion, either for coinage or storage. He ought to know that all the opposition developed was against unconditional repeal —against a measure which substituted the single gold standard for the purchasing clause. There is not a word in the democratic platform -authorizing unconditional repeal—there is not a word, nor anything that could be wrung into an intimation, in favor of the unconditional repeal of the purchasing clause of the Sherman act. Mr. Voorhees knew that fact when he and John Sherman were working, to annihilate the democratic policy, and he knows it now.

The democratic financial policy, as set forth in the democratic platform, was to repeal the Sherman law —the whole of it—bj' substituting legislation making silver and gold the money standard of the country. The democratic financial policy is the free coinage of silver—otherwise the people have been shamelessly betrayed by-the men in whom they placed their trust and to whom they confided their interests. If, therefore. Senator Voorhees was anxious to redeem himself, or to benefit the people, or to carry out the policy of the democratic party, why did he he not take an open course and introduce a measure embodying the pledge of the democratic platform—a measure providing for the use of both gold and silver as the money standard of the country without discriminating against hither metal? The contest is now between the single gold standard and the joint standard—between the gold dollar that is constantly increasing in purchasing power, thereby destroying values and knocking down prices, and the joint bimetallic standard that checks appreciation and prevents depreciation. It is a contest that must be fought out on its merits and by the light of experience—and the people are very rapidly accumulating all. the experience they need to enable them to dispose of this issue.' We advise Mr. Voorhees to enlarge his bill and make it a democratic measure. —Atlanta Constitution.