NATIONAL APPEAL!To The American Negro--Urging a Non-Partisan Study of The Finance Issue, as Enunciated in The Platform of The two Great Political Parties of the Country.THE FREE AND UNLIMITED COINAGE OF SILVER and GOLD at THE PRESENT RATIO of 16 to 1--VERSUS THE PRESENT GOLD STANDARD--WHY WE SHOULD FAVOR THE CHICAGO PLATFORM.

Copyrighted by G. E. Taylor(All Rights Reserved.)

In addressing this appeal to the Negroes of the Country, I do not wish to establish the conclusion that the argument herein, is not equally applicable to all races, whose conditions of servitude and position in the industrial and commercial realms are similar to ours; but I address myself thus, that my fellow Negro, may realize and appreciate, that the political, economic, financial, industrial and commercial questions of the hour, appeal to his considerate study and demand his most reasonable calculations; not from the standpoint of Negro--Partisan--Political logic, but upon the broad guaged scale of our common American citizenship; of our national interest in the mighty questions political, which enter into the life or death, the prosperity or stagnation of the commercial and industrial fabric of this, our common country.

It were well, perhaps, if the suggestions here made, were placed before the millions of other men, who, like the Negro, must toil for food and raiment.

For the first time in the history of our citizenship, fellow Negroes, are we confronted in a National campaign with issues that cannot be construed, as purely, strictly, partisan.

For the first time in the history of our citizenship, do we find the democratic platform declaring for measures which point more directly in the line of advantage to our race, than does that of the republican party.

Without consuming time to discuss this point, I simply direct you to a careful study of both platforms, for the proof of my propositions.

Surely, you will bear out the truth of this remark: The experience of the Negro delegates to the St. Louis convention, (I do not refer to the hotel catastrophe) who were among contested delegations, the wholesale turning down of Negro National Committeemen, and the absolute disregard for all of the great men of the race, such as the honorables: Jno. R. Lynch, B. K. Bruce, J. M. Langston, P. B. S. Pinchback, N. W. Cuney, Wm. Pledger, Perry Carson, and a hundred others of almost equal prominence, in itself, argue to you and to me, that a new era has dawned upon the once "grand old party" and that the "first born," (the Negro) is nearly, if no altogether forgotten.

Indeed my fellow Negro, it is as clear to me as the evening star upon a bright moon-light winters night, that, the day has already passed into history, never more to return, when any political party shall especially espouse OUR CAUSE.

And, I am satisfied, that it is thus. It is but the sequel to our progress, our development, and our prosperity. For we shall soon (if not already) find ourselves compelled to burst the traditional bands of partisanship and make a common survey of the political forest, using the same stakes, the same chains and the same blue pencils that the dominant races have used since the establishment of the government.

To be more specific, let me invite you to a comparison of the finance plank of the two great political parties.

You have read them for yourself and they are both found to be simple, clear and devoid of the least tinge of ambiguity or double meaning, which so often characterizes national political platforms.

Never before in the history of the democratic and republican parties, have the platforms been so comprehensible, so broad, and yet so simple and plain.

The sceptre of the king and the muscle of the common folk, have usually been discernible in party platforms, but the gildings, the trimmings, the silver edges and the gold linings, have generally been so deftly and artistically blended, that you nor I, could adequately comprehend the real meaning of the platforms, until the manipulators placed such consructions upon them as suited their own exalted end.

Since the days of Abraham Lincoln, and before, the great political issue (though adroitly covered up) in thus country has been "Capital vs. Labor."

Today we have the same issue, in an intensified, magnified sense. Is it hard for you to decide, my fellow Negro, or my fellow workingman, or my farmer friend, upon which side of this controversy rests your interests.

The glittering hand of the gold King (the capitalist) has for thirty years fanned the frying brow of the laborer of the land and wiped away the streams of sweat with the kerchief of "promise," or the napkin of fancied "hope," until at last; perseverance and patience have reluctantly weakened and the climax is now upon us.

Hence, we find the millionaire, the capitalist, the bond holder, the banker, the money gambler, the stock exchange broker, with a few conscientious, exceptions, all arrayed in battle, attire, and stationed upon the highland of international recognition,(?) proclaiming their unswerving allegiance to the present single gold standard.

They swear by the St. Louis platform. Why? Because they had that platform made to order;--made to their order, not made to the order of the republican party hosts, but made to the order of the manipulators, the gold barons of the land, who either import royal dukes or princes to marry their daughters, or export their sons and daughters to Europe that they may marry into the royalty and thus perpetuate their golden heirloom.

Have you, my fellow Negro, been interested in any of the gigantic speculations that have caused seventy per cent of the wealth of this country to enter into the hands of a very select few, who have practically cornered the money market of this country? Is it not clear that to continue with this single gold standard, is to appreciate the value of the standard money, and thus magnify the money power of those who possess the gold, to the extreme disadvantage of the country at large and to those who unfortunately are without the "golden blessing?"

Will you not readily admit, that the silver dollar is now and should be, the unit of money in this country from which all money values are figured? Can any one construe the constitution to mean any other than that "coin," (gold or silver) are the standard money of the country?

If it is your custom to wear a $10 suit of clothes, and you are unable to purchase any higher priced goods, what interest do you find in entering a store that deals in nothing but $50 suits? If gold is the only money that possesses real value, let me ask, how much of this valuable money have you got to-day under this beneficent (?) single gold standard system?

We were once in bondage. Was it right, was it just, was it equity to make us free, to clothe us with all the powers, liberty and advantages that the race of our masters enjoyed? The answer comes from 70,000,000 American hearts. "Yes." Then, by what manner of philosophy would you argue in favor of a discrimination between the yellow and the white money metalls? All agree that the yellow and the white man should be recognized as equal before the law, because we have learned that indeed both are men. Then, if it is unjust to discriminate between men on account of color, by what new rule shall we figure to draw the "color line" on money metals?

Now the constitution declares that both the yellow and the white metals are "coin," money. Then why not accord both an equal opportunity in the monetary race of life? The same objection is raised that was made 28 years ago by some when the civil rights bill and Negro suffrage were being discussed. It was then said that if the Negro were permitted to vote he would rise up and drive the white man from the south, etc. But the falsity of that argument is now apparent to all. The cry now is, "Coin silver as we now coin gold, and the yellow metal will soon be driven out of circulation,"--an hypothesis as false, as the one referred to above.

Now, my fellow Negro, if the hints found in this brief appeal excite your interest sufficiently to cause you to carefully study and compare the two remarkable political platforms, the St. Louis and the Chicago outputs, I have accomplished the end for which this is written

Having made this study and comparison myself, I am firmly of the opinion that the free and unlimited coinage of the two metals, silver and gold, at the present ratio of 16 to 1, is the proper system of finance for this country at this time. I am clear in the belief that this is the country and we are the people, to set the pace for the world, by establishing the double standard, for it is the only practical road that leads to ultimate universal bi-metallism.

That there is an affinity between gold and the rich man, no one will deny.

That a poor man can get hold of a silver dollar, easier and quicker than he can a gold dollar, all will admit.

That the laboring classes enjoy some of the society of silver money, is a truth, and that the gold barons have cunningly garnered away the gold in such a manner as to actually hold the government upon her knees, making supplication to them to "bring back! bring back! bring back thirty, sixty, a hundred millions of gold that we may place it in the reserve fund, and we (the government) will put a mortgage upon every laboring man and tax payer in the land, by issuing interest-bearing bonds, guaranteeing to pay you back in gold, with a premium," is a matter of record. Such is the present situation under this single gold standard system

A line or two more and I submit the propositions laid down in the two platforms in question to your considerate judgment.

Since you and I were made free men by the voice of God, transmitted by father Abraham, to what period are we compelled to go back, to reckon the beginning of panics, industrial discord, financial convulsions, strikes, lockouts, boycotts, etc. History compels you to answer, "1873." What occurred about that period? The demonetization of silver. What followed? Armies of tramps, destination, starvation upon the one hand, and millionaires upon the other.

Is it not true that the same has been the role, with occasional variations, until the present day? There is but one answer: "Yes."

Can you, my fellow Negro, reason out any objections that you should make to the remonetization, or the liberation of silver?

Can you answer to your own satisfaction, "Why should gold be king and silver slave?" Are you afraid that silver will drive from your pocket book the gold that you now posses?

I urge you to candidly discuss, study, investigate and search out these propositions, which are the meat, the bread, the water and the clothes of the present campaign. Take 0007them home with you and I am satisfied that you will conclude, that the Chicago platform declarations are the sentiments of the masses, the common people, in which case there is but one thing to do; support the platform and candidates who represent your principles.

Boldly stand up for liberty and freedom, free coinage of silver and gold, and prosperity.I am enthusiastically constrained, to urge the support of Bryan and Sewall for president and vice-president, believing that they come nearer representing the ideas of the people on the great issues of the day than do the other candidates.

Having read this appeal you are now in a fitting mood to read Document No. 2, which follows:

In the month of July, I wrote the foregoing, "National Appeal to the American Negro, or why We Should Favor the Chicago Platform," and published an edition of 10,000, distributing them largely among members of the race in the several States.

The "Appeal" was issued as an advance document, for the purpose of calling the attention of the reader to the importance of making a careful and impartial study of the paramount issues of the present campaign.

I entertained at that time a notion to publish this document, which in fact is simply a continuation of the "Appeal."

By the way of showing the favor with which "My Appeal" is received by many of the leading Republican Negroes of the country, permit me to submit here, the criticism of "Editor Perry" of the "Philadelphia Weekly Tribune" of date Aug. 29, 1896, which, leaving out the personal compliment, is as follows:

Mr. Taylor has favored us with a copy of a Democratic electioneering pamphlet writted by himself. He is editor of the "NEGRO SOLICITOR" and President of the Colored People's National Protective Association. We are inclined to be all bows and smiles to Mr. Taylor as a franz courageous, ambitious citizen, who commanded enough Democratic confidence up in Iowa to be sent to the Democratic National Convention.

Mr. Taylor's pamphlet is a "National Appeal to the American Negro" to support the Chicago Democratic platform. We read it because we wanted see what a gentleman like him could say to induce men of his race to support the Democratic party. This time the issue is silver, and upon this, Mr. Taylor makes his strongest appeal. We must read many arguments pro and con on the silver question, but it was reserved for Mr. Taylor to bring us to a dead stand-still with the one knock-over argument from which we see no escape, except by being officially sick or going fishing on election day.

Here is Mr. Taylor's clincher: "All agree that the yellow and the white man should be recognized as equal before the law, because we have indeed learned that both are men. Then if it is unjust to discriminate between men on account of color, by what rule shall we figure to draw the color line on money metals?" That beats any silver argument we ever heard of before. We can't answer it; we give it up.

We regret, however, that we are not in a position to offer advice to the Democratic campaign managers. If we were we should like to whisper in their ears the desirability of . . . . taking up his (Taylor's) cry and scattering broadcast his unanswerable argument in favor of free coinage of silver. . . . in this way Republican Negro spellbinders will be brought to a halt and the colored brother generally. will be moved to revise his political creed. We pause to catch our breath.

The above is quoted from Mr. Perry's editorial simply to show to my fellow Negro reader that when the mind is fairly employed in the study of these documents that the probable 0009result is light.

What are the issues as laid down in the republican platform and how would they affect our race were they all to be carried out to the letter?

Before giving a direct answer to the above question I desire to briefly review the platforms of the republican party from 1868 to the present, for reasons which will become apparent to the reader later on.

U.S. Grant was the nominee for President in 1868, and the main issues embodied in the platform of that year were: the success of the republican reconstruction policy; equal suffrage to all men; no repudiation of national debts; equalization and reduction of taxation; reduction of interest on public debt and gradual payment of same; improvement of national credit; honor to soldiers; encouragement of immigration; commendation of loyal men in the South.

In 1872 the republicans nominated U.S. Grant again, and the leading issues of the campaign were: the favoring of the enforcement of the new constitutional amendments; civil service reform, and the maintenance of the public credit.

In 1876 Rutherford B. Hayes was the republican nominee for President, and the main issues of the platform were: that the United States is a nation, not a league of states; for full protection to all citizens; for the redemption of United States notes in coin (not gold); against lands grants to corporations.

In 1880 James A Garfield was nominated on a platform that gloried over the success of the party in the resumption of special payments and indulged in the ordinary pledges favoring protection, pensions, internal improvements.

In 1874 James, G. Blaine, the great statesman, was the nominee, and the platform urged an international standard of gold and silver; denounced the importation of contract labor; favored the extension of the navy; civil service reform and liberal pensions; free ballot and fair count; pledged to secure to all persons their full political rights.

In 1888 Benjamin Harrison was the nominee for President and the platform was a reiteration of that of 1884 and proclaimed against the accumulation of a surplus in the Treasury. The "force bill" was endorsed strongly.

In 1892 Benjamin Harrison was again nominated the platform declaring for protection, bimetalism, a free ballot and honest count; extension of foreign commerce; pensions; opposing southern outrages pauper immigration, trusts.

During each of those campaigns the republican party was successful, excepting that of 1884 and 1892.

Now take up the Republican platform proclaimed at the St. Louis convention, June 16, 1896 and make comparison with the platforms of former campaigns and note the absence 0010of the usual planks relating directly to the Negro.

You are compelled to admit that not a single syllable is found either in the St. Louis platform or in the McKinley letter of acceptance that refers directly or indirectly to the regulation of matters in any part of the country, the object or purpose of which is to alleviate the condition of the Negro or especially improve his environments socially, civilly, politically, or otherwise.

No longer do we read in the republican platform that worn-out declaration, "We pledge ourselves to secure to all the people of every state the full and complete right to the exercise of their political opinions." "We declare for a free ballot and an honest count," etc., etc.

Why are these declarations left out? It is because the Negroes in all parts of the country are now enjoying the full exercise of a "free ballot and a fair count?"

Why have the republicans ceased to condemn lynching and other outrages, of which Negro has been the usual victim? Is it because they no longer lynched, outraged, or intimidated? If so, then it must be admitted that such a state of affairs have been brought about since 1892, which would give the honor to the present democratic administration, for the republican platform of 1892 was emphatic in its denunciation of these evils.

In the face of prominent facts it hardly seems necessary to offer a single argument to convince any Negro that he is no longer counted as a special subject over whom the republican party is ward.

The prominent planks of the republican platform this year, as considered by Mr. McKinley in his letter of acceptance, are these: the finance(i.e., the gold standard policy); the effect upon farmers and laborers; protective tariff; a civil service reform; merchant marine and navy; our soldiers and sailors; foreign immigration; reciprocity and the panic.

Upon all of the above issues Mr. McKinley argues at great length and offers not the slightest suggestion as to what should, or might, or could be done to harmonize matters between the Negro and the whites in those sections where naught but discord and turbulence are said to prevail.

For the first time since the death or Abraham Lincoln do we find the republican national platform as silent as an untouched dumb-bell on the Negro question.

Does not this silence disturb you to some degree, my fellow Negro ?

Is it not clear to you that by leaving you out, a strong appeal is made to that element who have always ignored and despised 0011you?

Because of this silence are not the southern gold bug sugar planter, cotton raiser, and capitalist found flocking in great armies to the support of this platform and McKinley?

Can you refrain from noticing the unusual effort on the part of the republican managers to capture the votes of the southerners?

To fully comprehend the attitude of the republicans at this time toward us it is only necessary to read the platform and study the McKinley speech of acceptance. Read, and read between the lines.

The great hobby of Mr. McKinley and his party is "protection."

"Protection" is a misnomer, a misleader, a word or term that is fraught with more deception than any one word in the English vocabulary. Sweet of sound, pleasing to the eye, and stimulating to the mind is this word "protection," and many have been allured by its false face and deceitful clamor.Protection in fact is a good thing. We would all gladly be protected.

We would like to be protected from all injury; we would like to be protected from bodily harm; we would like to be protected from the ravages of ignorance; we would like to be protected from the pains of poverty; we would like to be protected from the tyranny of monopoly; we would like to be protected from the lynch mob. Yes, there are a thousand evils from which we would fain be protected.

But this "protection," that has failed for nearly thirty consecutive years to "protect," is a bogus protection, which seems to have only assisted those in power and prominence to acquire more wealth and power. For wealth is power.

We are not so dumb or so poorly advised but that we know that nearly every factory or work-shop in which protected articles are manufactured keeps a pad-lock on their doors against the entrance of Negro labor. Then where is the benefit to the Negro resulting from this protective tariff policy?

Since the induction of the Negro upon this continent he has been counted an important factor in the industrial realm of the country. But for our labor we had never been brought here, and had our labor not been needed here we had been exterminated long since.

Since the abolition of slavery the Negro has more than doubled 0012in population, and since our percentage of tramps, lunatics, dependents, and paupers are smaller than that of any other class of American citizens, considered from a comparative standpoint, it must be conceded that we are an exceedingly strong element of the industrial forces of the country. This being true, then we are entitled to the fairest consideration and should be especially interested in all questions that arise which threaten to disturb the industrial affairs of the country. This conclusion brings us to the consideration of the paramount issue of this campaign,

The McKinley platform declares for gold and gold only, while the Bryan platform declares for silver and gold. The former desires a half-bushel measure and the latter a bushel measure, or the former favors the present single gold standard and the latter a double standard of gold and silver.

The McKinleyite tells you that to adopt "free coinage" would be to drive gold to a premium.

The facts are that gold is already demanding and bringing a premium. If not, why are money loaners and landlords demanding "gold notes and gold leases?" Does not gold now buy twice as much of the farmers' produce as it did before silver was demonetized?

If to adopt free coinage of silver and gold will drive gold to a premium why are not the holders of gold in favor of free coinage? Think you that they are unwilling to accept a premium?

Why is it that England, the ruler of the gold market of the world, so strongly opposes the free and unlimited coinage of silver if that system would place a preumium upon gold? Has England ever been known to refuse a

But, say the McKinleyites, "free coinage will give us a fifty-cent dollar and thus rob the laborer and farmer of half of his earnings."

The answer is: A dollar of U.S. money means 100 cents and cannot be more or less. A qualified dollar may be either less or more. But it is true that a dollar will sometimes buy more of certain commodities than at others, according to the supply or demand of commodities or dollars.

We admit that when the supply of dollars is enhanced to a considerable extent that the price of various commodities, labor included will go up, and what laboring man or woman will object to that?

When labor, farm products, and all other products of labor are advancing in price, good times prevail and general prosperity reigns. Then if the argument of the gold bug that to adopt free coinage will so greatly enhance the price of labor and commodities resulting therefrom is to be accepted it is time for us all to pray God to speed the day of the success of this free coinage, for prosperity is what we want and need.

Look at the marvelous development of South and Central America, Asia, and Mexico since they have adopted the free coinage of silver. It is not fair to simply point to those countries and compare them with this country, but compare them now with what they were formerly.

Another McKinleyite says: "Gold has intrinsic value, and hence is the most suitable of all metals for money."

If the lessons of the Bible are worth noticing it is clear that the Creator placed a much lower value (intrinsically) upon gold than do the worshipers of the McKinley platform. Indeed gold has always been the greatest enemy that the cause of God has been compelled to combat with, according to the "good book," although we admit that silver on one occasion did a deal of mischief, in one sense and in another sense, it very materially aided in carrying out the Divine plan.

Intrinsically, silver is just as valuable as gold. Statistics show that the price or value of gold has fluctuated much more than that of silver. The proscription against silver and the unjust discrimination in favor of gold by this and European nation have increased (placed a premium) the demand for the yellow metal and consequently decreased the demand for silver, which makes the apparent intrinsic value of gold exceed that of silver.

No commodity possesses intrinsic value except such as are necessary to the sustenance of the life, health, and comfort of the human family.

Another McKinley gold bug tells us that free coinage will force all the gold to leave the country.

A false prediction which has been made by the worshipers or holders of gold for many years and which has been proven false every time a trial has been made. When specie resumption was ordered in 1878 they argued that "all the gold would be driven out of the country." Did not their prediction then prove false? They charged and roared in like manner in 1892 when the "Sherman purchasing law" was passed. And again they were found to be greatly mistaken. But none can deny that since the repeal of the Sherman law, gold has flowed out of the country faster than ever before.

But, say a large class of McKinleyites, that free coinage of silver will prove only a benefit to the silver mine owner.

What strange philosophy these gold bug worshipers must have studied. If the free coinage of silver will inaugurate 50-cent dollars, how can such a system enrich the owners of silver bullion? It would occur to the average mathematician that such a system would work to the mine or bullion owner ruin instead of wealth. The truth is, that free coinage will benefit the mine owner, the mine laborer, the coal operator, the coal digger, the owners of railroads, railway employes, foundry and factory owners, the operatives of the same, farmers and farm laborers, and merchants and all business men except those directly interested in gold or gold mining. Indeed it will benefit banks, insurance companies, and loan and building associations in the long run, for it will enable the masses to get hold of money with which to pay their obligations. But, true enough, it will be a stumbling stone in the path of the highly developed combines and trust monopolies which now control the gold supply of the land.

Along comes another gold disciple and tells in tones that ring mellow and deep, that we now have as much money in the country as we ever had, and hence there is no need of increasing the money volume by coining silver free as gold is now coined.

The report of the "Mint Director" does not confirm such a statement. But, suppose the volume of money is as large as it has ever been. Are not the resources of the country gradually increasing year after year? As the country develops is it not reasonable to expect that the demand for a larger volume of money would be the order? And, whether the money volume is larger or smaller, we all know that there is less money in circulation now than has been known in thirty years, at least we find that money is harder to get hold of today than it has been since the war. The farmer, the miner, the laborer, all, will attest to this fact.

The time was when he would labor could command wages, but that time is no more for labor can no longer command a price.

A somewhat conservative goldite steps up and says, I would not object to the free coinage of silver, but I don't think the United States alone could make a success of it.

Well, it is hardly likely that in 1775 all the colonists thought that this country alone could establish a republican form of government and make a success of it: but Washington, Jefferson, Hancock, and others insisted that it "could be done," and now the entire world openly congratulates us upon our glorious achievements; and many countries have patterned after us.

Shall we admit that the United States is incapable of governing her own affairs? Shall we proclaim to the world that we must lean upon England for support? Is this government 0014a financial baby? Are we compelled to get consent of England or Europe before we can legislate upon matters of finance? Will some one take the pains to explain why we should consult the foreign powers upon matters of finance any more than we should upon matters pertaining to the tariff, which more materially interests foreign powers than does the money standard? It is my matured opinion that this government is fully able to take care of herself and regulate her own money policy as well as to establish laws for the government and protection of her subjects and institutions.

A good old veteran comes along and says, I would not object to the free coinage of silver, but I fear that should it maintain that the old soldier will draw his pension in cheap money and that bank depositors will share likewise.

Much of the foregoing argument in favor of free coinage applies to these last objections. Do you know that the mints could not possibly coin more than 50 millions of dollars a year if they were kept constantly engaged on the white metal? Are you not fully aware that in the event of free coinage, gold has as good a chance to be coined as it now has? Allowing that 50 millions of silver dollars would be coined annually it would take twenty years to restore prices and wages back to where they were before 1873.

It is significantly apparent that gold of itself is unable to supply the ponderous money demands of the country. The total valuations of the country exceed 70 billion dollars. The total indebtedness, public and private, exceeds 30 billion. The total amount of money in the country a little more than exceeds one billion and a half dollars, of which only about a half billion is gold. By a little figuring then you will see that there is much less than enough money in the country to pay six percent interest on the total indebtedness.

An honest gold bug laboring man proclaims that he objects to the free coinage of silver because he finds that wages are highest in countries where the gold standard is in vogue.

The truth is, that high wages (comparatively) are paid in some gold standard countries and low wages prevail in some; that high wages and low wages both prevail in free silver countries according to the supply or demand of laborers.

History proves that in all of the gold standard countries wages reached the highest notch under bimetalism, long before the single gold standard policy was inaugurated. To prove this point the reader need not go further than the history of this country.

It cannot be denied that wages and the products of labor have gradually declined since 1873 in this and other gold standard countries. While in free silver Mexico, South and Central America and Japan, wages have actively advanced.

Would you wish to become acquainted with some of the 0015gold standard countries where starvation wages are paid, study the history of San Domingo, Egypt, Spain, Italy, or Turkey.

It is claimed by some that the low prices which labor and its products demand are due to an over production

While there are millions of idle acres of rich land stretching across the western prairies, hundreds of thousands of able horses running wild upon our plains, millions of dollars worth of farm machinery rusting under old sheds, there cannot be an over production of laborers, especially when you consider that there are thousands of idle factories and mines.

And, on the other hand, while there are hundreds of thousands of hungry families who are suffering for want of clothes as well as food, there can be but little room to argue that there is an overproduction of clothing materials, or farm produce.

If there is an overproduction of farm products, why does not flour come down commensurate with the fall of wheat? When the farmer sold his potatoes for 50 cents a bushel the washerwoman paid ten cents a package for starch. And now when the farmer can hardly get 15 cents a bushel for potatoes the washerwoman still pays 10 cents a package for starch. The same might be traced along down the line until the spectacle would become alarming But I must make this document as brief as possible, and the reader is left to continue his investigations to his own satisfaction.

The further you go in your investigations the more apparent it will become that under the present system the monopolist manufacturer, the trust sales-houses and "money combines" have manipulated matters to suit their own aggrandizement, to the utter disregard of the welfare of the farmer and consumer.

Money is always harder to get in any country under a restricted coinage policy. Every evidence of an overproduction of commodities is simply an indication of an over-estimated value of money.

We are told that the present crisis is due to the disturbance of "confidence," brought on by the agaitation of free coinage and the reduction of the tariff.

Such a proposition is both erroneous and unjustified by facts and history.

For more than twenty years the prices of commodities and labor in this country have been on the decline, and history discloses the fact that when the prices of staple commodities and labor decline "confidence" also declines, as if from sympathy. When prices are advancing and the wages are going up, "confidence" is restored and money goes in search of opportunities for investment.

If you have carefully followed the line of "confidence" in this country during the last 25 years you are aware that as"confidence" seemed to be retiring the free coinage of silver agitation simultaneously revived. By this you will note that the free coinage sentiment is a result, and not as many would argue a cause.

If free coinage stagnates business, why has the Bank of London so industriously opened a branch bank in Mexico City, the metropolis of free silver Mexico?

A single gold standard means a concentration of the base money of the country, hence the confidence of investors would necessarily be weakened, for the more generally money is distributed the more encouraging is it for the investor.

Well, then, says another gold friend, if you must have free coinage of silver, why not change the ratio and put a dollar's worth of bullion in a dollar instead of 50 cents worth?

Such a proposition is the fruit of ignorance. Suppose you would coin silver at the ratio of 30 to 1 instead of 16 to 1? Under this proposition the value of the dollar is based upon the value of silver bullion on the market of the world. A few years hence, suppose that the market value of silver bullion goes up (or down) 5 cents or 1 cent per ounce, what would you do then, call in all of your 30 to 1 dollars and melt them over, destroy your 30 to 1 dies and make new ones to correspond with the then market value of silver bullion?

Without further argument you can readily see that the silver money of the country would be subject to all sorts of fluctuations and changes which would absolutely make it impossible to maintain a parity between silver and gold.

The silver dollar of this country now contains more silver than do the equivalent coin of any nation, except Mexico. If our ratio should be changed to 30 to 1 it would be necessary to get the European ratio of 151/2 changed correspondingly or as fast as our coin reached Europe it would be coined into the money of other countries, and we would by this be heavy losers.

While much that might be said in favor of the free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold is omitted in the foregoing, it seems to me that I have indulged sufficiently to assist the reader in fortifying himself against the onslaughts of the gold bug and to stimulate a deeper study of this, the most ponderous question of the age.

My efforts are simply to assist the reader, the American Negro, the farmer, the coal miner, the silver miner, the factory hand, the common wage earner, and all who practically belong to the great industrial family that their interests are centered in the free coinage policy.

Let him that hath eyes look and see. Let him that hath ears listen and hear, for verily the capitalist, the monopolist, the gold broker, and the millionaires of the world are now making a concerted, desperate effort to thwart the will of the people in this controversy. They are on the gold side, which forces the issue between them and you, if you are one of the common folk.

The present campaign is decidedly a fight for supremacy between the East and Northeast on the gold side and the great South, West, and Mississippi Valley, on the side of silver and gold. As 75 per cent of the Negroes of the country are residents of the South and 15 per cent are residents of the Mississippi Valley and the West, it is vividly apparent as to where we are most interested, viewed from a geographical standpoint.

By this I do not mean to claim that the silver issue is a sectional one, but that the lines of battle are drawn sectionally. And this is easy to understand--when it is considered that New York City is to the American money market, what London is to the money market of the world. The east is the home of the millionaires of the land, hence the strong sympathy of that section with the gold standard policy. They own and control the gold of the country. See?

As a matter of fact, however, the masses of the east will share the profits of free coinage equally with those of the south and west, although they are so hoodwinked by the influence of the nabobs that they themselves hardly recognize the fact now.

In 1872 there were less than twenty millionaires in the United States. Today there are thousands of them.

Before 1873 the term "tramp" was unheard of, and since then it is a common term and is applied to every stranger who ask for a job or a morsel of bread. Yes, and nearly every state in the union today has on its statue books some, sort of heinous "tramp law."

Why these serious changes within the past 23 years? Consult the demonetization act of 187 and subsequent laws which have forced upon us the present gold standard policy, together with the robber tariff laws which have prevailed during most of the interim since 73, which have augured to make the poor man poorer and the rich man richer by giving a subsidy to the manufacturer, enabling him to enhance the price of his commodity, thus reducing the wages or earnings of the consumer.

Just about the time when gold legislation began.

Go back to the files of Congress and consult them and see 0018if you can find a single line of legislation in the special interest of the Negro since 1873.

In fact there is scarcely a decision of the Supreme court recorded since 1873 touching the race significantly but that such decision is against us.

Are not these facts argumentative that the sympathies of that power which controls the elements that produce gold bug laws are not with the Negro?

Shall we not, like all free men, protect and defend the dignity of our own household?

If we are inclined to believe that free coinage is the proper system for us, are we not justified by the history of the past to come out badly and lay aside all party fealty (because the republican party has laid aside) and assist in the establishment of a safer, more economical better regulated, money policy, by the election of Bryan and Sewall, the champions of the west and south, the standard bearers of the people's cause, the free coinage of silver and gold at the present legal ratio of 16 to 1?

It is time, my fellow Negro, that we awaken to the fact that we are not now engaged in a campaign between men, but that this is a campaign of principles which are as fundamental as the very constitution of the government.

We are fighting to maintain the money of the constitution, and the gold bug adversary is fighting to perpetuate the money of Baron Rothschilds.

We are fighting for more labor, which means better clothes for our family, better houses in which to dwell and better food.

The gold bug is fighting for more power. More grinding power.

How do you stand and where are you?

On which side do you belong, with the wealthy, the money loaner, the banker, the bondholder, the corporation lawyer, the rich sugar planter, the English owner of the large cotton plantations, the railway magnates, the insurance coporations, or that of the common people, the farmer, the miner, the day laborer or mechanic?

Choose your side and choose quickly and get in line by identifying yourself where you think you properly belong.

My most urgent request is, that you be honest with yourself aftermeasuring the ground of the two sides, gold monometalism versus silver and gold.

Like an untried massive engine, neither the Negroes of the United States nor the republican nor Democratic parties know or appreciates the political strength of the race. The reason is obvious. We have generally voted and trained with the republican 0019party, which has generally been successful.

In 1892 we vowed our enmity towards Harrison as a rebuke for the unkindness he had shown us. In Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, New York, Michigan, and a few other states our influence or political strength was in a measure felt. Now, just compute a little: There are nearly 10,000,000 Negroes in the United States (according to the best authority), which gives us a right to claim about 2,000,000 votes. We are scattered through the doubtful states in large enough proportions to turn such states which ever way we may cast our vote. If such doubtful states go republican then the cry is, "Oh, it's just as I supposed. I knew that those darkies were all right, etc."

But if our vote turns such doubtful states silverwards the g o. p will begin to look around and inquire, "What's the matter with John, that he went back on us?" And the victorious silverite will exclaim: "Well, we made a good fight, and those Negroes came to our rescue nobly, and we must reward them!"

The future result will be that we shall then not only share with others in the beneficence of suitable finance laws, but that we will be more properly noticed and rewarded by the silverites for our loyalty to them and also by the republicans as a bate to coax us back into the old fold.

When as a race we have placed ourselves in such a position we shall share, as other races do, the honors of political victories and we never can hope to until we do this.

There is power in the Negro vote, great power. Shall we exercise this power to our own advantage or shall we continue to serve the political god with a golden yoke because Abraham Lincoln was a republican and through the providence of events he proclaimed that "human slavery must cease?"

The body of John Brown lies molding in the clay, and in company with that of good "old Abe," his soul goes marching on.

Every man is an artist and is destined to hew out his own course in life.

We must learn the lesson of true manliness, which cannot be construed to rest upon "dependence."

Would we reach the highest mark in life as men and citizens we must do our own reading, our own thinking, our own acting.

The education of our fathers will not serve us. The clothes our fathers wore will not fit us now. The reputations our fathers bore for truth and veracity will not serve as our recommendation.

The huts in which our fathers lived and reared large families we find to be too small for the accommodation of our families.

The obligations of our fathers are not our obligations.

The contracts we are making our fathers will not be called upon to fill, and the political contracts of our fathers were all fully kept by them.

If we are in fact free men then let us exercise that freedom as our minds may dictate without feeling in any wise obligated by the history of thirty years ago.

It is impossible for us to succeed in carrying out the program of Lincoln and Summer when there is no party today that adopts such a program.

The Lincolns, the Summers, the Carrisons, the Greeleys, the Chases, the Sewards, and all of their compatriots of political prominence are gone, and the republican party no longer refers to them in its deliberations, platforms, or edicts.

We now have the new man, the new woman, the new political methods, the new republicanism, the new Democracy.

We are under special obligations to none.

Our main political duty, our whole duty, our only (political) duty is to strive to serve our country's highest and best interest and promote the welfare of the sovereign people by our political actions, to the best of our ability, as "God gives us to see the right."

By so doing we will serve well our individual interests and prove our worthiness to the title, "American Citizen."

With firm convictions that the theory of free coinage is the best financial policy for the country and that Bryan and Sewall are the real exponents of the principles which lie nearest the hearts of the American people, I am,Very respectfully,GEO. E. TAYLOR.Oskaloosa, Ia., Sept. 21, 1896.

Interesting Notes on the Finance Legislation of the United States.At the suggestion of Hamilton, in his report to Congress in 1791, the first coinage act was adopted and became a law April 2,1792. This act was known as "An Act Establishing a Mint and Regulating the Coinage of the United States." The dollar coined by this act contained 371 4-16 grains of pure silver, or 416 grains of standard silver. Silver and gold as standard money.

The second coinage law was passed by Congress June 28, 1834. The original law standing without change a little over 42 years. By this second act the pure gold in the Eagle was reduced from 242 1/2 grains to 232 grains. The alloy was changed from 22 1/2 to 26, making the Eagle contain 10 1/2 grains less pure gold than originally. Silver coins were not changed. The first ratio was 15 to 1, and this second act made the ratio a little over 16 to 1. Silver and gold still remained the standard money.

Third act or law known as "The Mint Act of 1837" was passed Jan. 18, 1837. This act changed the standards of both metals and also the ratio. Instead of 23.20 23.22 grains of pure gold was put into a dollar. The silver dollar was changed to 412 1/2 grains standard, but no change made in the quantity of pure silver contained in the dollar. The ratio was changed to 15.98 to 1. This dollar has been called "The Dollar of the Daddies."

The fourth act became a law March 3, 1849, and only increased the provision for the mintage of gold and authorized the coinage of double Eagles and gold dollars. No change was made in the standard or ratio.

The fifth coinage law was passed in February, 1853. It reduced the half-dollar from 206 1/4 grains standard silver to 192. All smaller coins were reduced proportionately. It provided that the government should purchase the bullion used in the coinage of all fractional silver coins, which was the first hard blow to the "free and unlimited coinage of silver." The coinage of the "three dollar gold piece" was also authorized by this act.

The sixth act was passed in February, 1862, and is known as the "Legal Tender Act." By this act $300,000,000 in greenbacks were issued. A war necessity just as was the "abolition of slavery." Gold and silver soon went into "hiding" after the passage of this act and both metals commanded a premium. Gold reached to 185 per cent in June, 1884.

The eighth law, that famous "Demonetization Act," was passed by Congress Feb. 12, 1873. Its provisions were that 0022the gold coins "shall be a one-dollar piece, which, at the standard weight of 25.8 grains, shall be the unit of value." The silver coins were declared to be a "Trade Dollar." The weight of this dollar was fixed at 420 grains troy. Silver dollars were declared to be a legal tender only to the amount of five dollars. By this act, the life blood of the silver dollar was drained from it. No change was made in minting privileges, except as related to fractional currency.

Act ninth, was adopted July 22, 1876. It provided that "the trade dollar should no longer be a legal tender for any debt," and "authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to limit the coinage of the same, as he might choose." Subsequently an act was passed to redeem (or call in) all outstanding Trade Dollars, at par and to coin the same into standard dollars. By this act it is probable that the government sustained a loss of nearly $35,000,000.

Act tenth, known as the "Bland-Allison Act," became a law Feb. 28, 1878. It restored the silver dollar of 412 1/2 grains with full legal tender power, but did not restore silver bullion to the minting privileges it enjoyed up to 1873. It directed the Secretary of the Treasury, to purchase silver bullion monthly at the "market prece," not less than $2,000,000 nor more than $4,000,000 worth per month. The same to be coined monthly into dollars.

Act eleventh, was passed July 14, 1800. This act made it compulsory upon the Treasurer to purchase 5,500,000 ounces of silver per month. To pay for the same in certificates, called Treasury Notes, redeemable in gold or silver coin and clothed with full legal tender power. The payments for bullion under the act of 1878 were made in cash. There was no compulsory coinage of silver bullion under the act of 1800 only at the rate of $2,000,000 monthly until July 1, 1891. The act of 1890 is known as the "Sherman Act."

While in extra session the House repealed the Sherman Act Aug. 28, 1893, and the Senate voted the repeal of the same Oct. 20, 1893. Thus ends the legislation of the United States upon matters of finance.