Congressman Durand's Speech

A Washington correspondent of the New York Tribune says of Congressman Durand's speech on the finauce question , The speeoh of Congressruan Durund, of Michigan, on the currency, has not rfceived the attention to which it is entitled. It immediately followed in the House the short clear speech of Prof. Seelye in behalf of honest money, and so the reporters have been content to say : " Mr. Durand followed with a speech ou the same side." The truth is, that as Mr. Seelye's brief speech was an admirably logiöal deinonstration of the necessity of a return to cash payuients through contiaotiou, so was Mr. Durand's offort one of the clearest and strongest yet inadu in the House showing the great expense of the inconvertible ourrency. If the one is an admirable help to our tuinkers, the other is a first-rate contribution to the stock of "information for the people." It is claimed by many Western men here that Mr. Durand is a truly represeutative man of that section ; that, indeed, upon the most vital of living issues he represents a large majority of the best men of both parties in the West. " How goes the battle in Michigan f they ask. Here are Williams, Durand, and Potter, Democrats of a mild type, who have succeeded three inflation Republicano: Field, Begole, and Burrowa, and these mild Democrats are all haid money men. And then if you ask how such men as .Landers come to get here trom the West, these Western supporters of resumption will say in their rougu way, " O, Landers is no worsn an inflationist than Coburn, and amigtity xight better fellow; but look at Kerr ! He cleaned out a soft money Demoorat in the New Albany district." Iu short, I discover that nearly every Western man I meet here, except some from Indiana and Ohio, is for hard money, and asserts tbat Mr. Durand is a true representativo of the Northwest. It is certain that he uttered no uncertain words for honest money on Saturday, and if these people of whom I speak are truthful it would be wise for some Republican from that section to advooate cash payments. Thus far a Democratie niembor has a monopoly of ths business, and has all the honor, while the Republicans have been standing idly by flunnting bloody shirts. The neglect to place Senator Shermnn on the list of delegates at largu (from the Ohio Convention) has a sisrnificance that no feeble talk about local jeaolousy can explain away, and 'he country can undorstand, without waitingforexplanations, précisely what happpned. The Ohio delegation, as non8tituted, will break up the moment the contest grows serious, dividing between Bristow and Morton, with the majority for Bristow, and perhaps two or three votes for Blaine. - Cincinnati Commercial