.- •o^'^f^/

SIIvVKR

IN THE

^IFTY-FIRST CONGRESS,

PiwM liy a Soimary of tie Coinage Laws of k MU States,

PRIOR TO 1873,

And a History of the Act of 1873 and the
Act of 1878.

ISSUED BY THE

?JATIONAL. EXECUTIVE SILVER COMMITTEE,
-^ 1890.

— 6~67^'@'"^r$5 —

Washington, D. C:

Geo. K. Gray, Peinteb.

1890.

LTIONAL SILVER COMMITTEE.

ZO IRWIN.

CHEYNEY.

? G. FLETCHER.

lES McCADDEN.

. HATHAWAY.

)SEPH SHELDON.

jiMBiA— LEE CRANDALL.

HAMMOND.

LVANAGH.

E. PHELPS.

:AS H. NELSON.

3LLER.

FORTESCUE.

)ER POIGNARD.

5. FRIERSON.

IE W. LADD.

VER N. BRYAN.

-E. M. BOYNTON.

Minnesota— JAMES McARTHUR.
MissouEi-JOHN DONIPHAN.
Montana— CHAS. F. MUSSIGEROAD.
Nebraska— ALLEN ROOT.
Nevada-FRANCIS G. NEWLANDS.
New Jersey— WM. BRINDLE.
New Mexico— SAMUEL D. BALDWIN..
New York- JOHN THOMPSON.
North Carolina— ALFRED M. SCALES
Ohio— A. J. WARNER.
Pennsylvania— JOHN A. GRIER.
South Carolina-JOHN E. BRADLEY.
Tennessee— ANDREW J. KELLAR.
Texas— CHARLES LONGUEMARE.
TTtah— WM. F. JAMES.
ViEGiNiA-JOHN L. COCHRAN.
Washington— THOMAS FITCH.
Wyoming— M. N. GRANT.

JAMIN COLVIN.

lAiRMAN, A. J. WARNER. Marietta, Ohio.
:ce-Chaikman, THOMAS FITCH, Seattle, Washington.
SCRET'ARY, LEE CRANDALL, Washington, D. C.

NATIONAL

EXECUTIVE SILVER COMMITTEE.

EDWARDS PIERREPONT, New York.

FRANCIS G. NEWLANDS, Nevada.
L. M. RUMSEY, Missouri.

FRANK M. PIXLEY, California.

JOHN L. COCHRAN, Virginia.

H. B. CHAMBERLAIN, Colorado.

THOMAS H. NELSON, Indiana.

A. J. WARNER, Chairman.

FRANCIS G. NEWLANDS, Vice Chairman.

GEORGE B. WILLIAMS, Treasurer.

LEE CRANDALL, Secretary.

OTTF-ICE :
1Q09 PENNSYLVANIA AVENUE

WASHINGTON, D. C.

rage.

Chaptek I.— The Act of 1792.— The First Coinage Law ----- 5

Chaptee II.— Coinage Laws from 1792 to 1873 ------- 8

Dhaptke III.— The Act of 1873 . - - 16

Chaptee IV.— The Bland-Allison Act of 1878 -------- 43

OHArTEB v.— Period from 1878 to 1890 - - - 52

Chapter VI.— Silver in the Fifty -first Congress ------- 65

Chaptee VII.— The Caiicus Bill Considered ui the House 72

Chaptee VIII.— The House Caucus Bill in the Senate 89

Celaptee IX.— The Senate Free Coinage Bill in the House - - - 114

Chaptee X. — ^The Conference Committee - 144

Chaptee XL— The Effect of the Law -*--.----- 156

Appendix ..-- -..-.-.159

SILVER IN THE FIFTY-FIRST CONGRESS,

Including a Summary of the Coinage Laws of the United States prior to iSyjf
with a History of the Act of iSyj and the Act of 18^8.

CHAPTER I.

Thb Act op 1792. — The First Coinage Law.

The first act of the Congress of the United States respecting coiJi-
agewas the act of April 2, 1792, entitled ^^ An act establishing a Mint
and regulating the coin^ of the United States. ' '

The ninth section of this act provided —

"That there shall be from time to time struck and coined at the
said Mint, coins of gold, silver, and copper of the following denomi-
nations, values and descriptions, viz: Eagles — each to be of the
value of ten Dollars or Units, and to contain two hundred and forty-
seven grains and four-eighths of a grain of pure, or two hundred and
seventy grains of standard gold."

Then, after providing for half eagles, each to be of half the value of
the eagle, and quarter eagles, eacli to be of one-fourth of the value
of the eagle, the section continues, as follows:

''Dollars or Units — each to be of the value of a Spanish milled dol-
lar as the same is now current, and to contain three hundred and sev-
enty-one grains and four-sixteenth parts of a grain of pure, or four
hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver."

The act also provided for half dollars, quarter dollars, dimes and
half dimes, each to contain, respectively, one-half, one-fourth, one-
tenth and one-twentieth of the pure silver contained in the dollar.
The coinage of cents and halt cents of copper were also provided for.

It will thus be seen that in this first coinage act the words ' ' dollar or
unit " are applied equally to dollars of gold and the dollar of silver —
that is, "dollar" is the name of the unit of money in our system, and
the gold eagle was to be of the value of ten dollars, or units. The
coin, however, which represented exactly the unit was the silver
dollar, and the act provided that it should be of the value of the
Spanish milled dollar, as that piece was then current. The assay
of a number of Spanish dollars, then in common use, showed thein

to contain three hundred and seventy-one and a fourth grains of
pure silver, or four hundred and sixteen grains of standard silver.

The proportion of pure gold to the alloy in gold coins was made
by this act, eleven parts gold and one part alloy, the alloy being
composed of silver and copper. The proportion of pure silver to the
alloy in silver coins was made fourteen -hundred and eighty-five parts
fine silver to one hundred and seventy-nine parts alloy. The reason
for this proportion of silver to alloy was that the alloy was found in
that proportion in the Spanish dollars then current. These coins
having been a long time in circulation were more or less worn, and
their assay did not show the exact original weight of the coin, and
probably not the exact original proportion of alloy. The alloy in
the silver dollar consisted of 44|- grains of copper, making the dollar
892.4 fine ; this, as will be seen in another chapter, was afterwards
changed to 414- grains of copper, making the standard nine-tenths
fine.

Section 11 of the act provided —

"That the proportional value of gold to silver in all coins which
shall by law be current as money within the United States, shall
be as 15 to 1, according to quantity in weight, of pure gold or
pure silver ; that is to say, every fifteen pounds weight of pure silver
shall be of equal value in all payments with one pound weight of
pure gold, and so in proportion as to any greater or less quantities of
the respective metals."

A dollar of gold contained 24.75 grains of pure metal, and a
dollar of silver 371.25 grains — being exactly 15 to 1.
Section 14 provided —

'' That it shall be lawful for any person or persons to bring to the
said Mint gold and silver bullion, in order to their being coined; and
that the bullion so brought shall be there assayed and coined as
speedily as may be after the receipt thereof, and that free of expense
to the person or persons by whom the same shall have been brought.
And as soon as the said bullion shall have been coined, the person
or persons by whom the same shall have been delivered, shall upon
dernand, receive in lieu thereof coins of the same species of bullion
which shall have been so delivered, weight for weight, of the pure
gold or pure silver therein contained."

Section 16, which follows, made the coinage of both metals equally
a lawful tender in all payments whatsoever,' thus establishing the
free coinage and full legal tender of both metals without ' limit at
the ratio of 15 to 1. The exact language of Section 16, of the act, is:

''That all tlie gold and silver coins which shall have been struck

at, and issued from the said Mint, shall be a lawful tender iu all
payments whatsoever; those of full weight according to the respec-
tive values hereinbefore declared, and those of less than full weight
at values proportional to their respective weights."

Thus it will be seen that by this first act of Congress establishing
the mint, gold and silver, as recomraended by Hamilton and Jefferson,
and approved by Washington, were placed upon an exact equality as
money metals, and their coinage made free and unlimited.*

The ratio of 15 to 1 for American coins was not exactly in accord-
•ance with the ratio which then prevailed in European countries.
Silver was slightly over-valued and gold a little under-valued. The
result was that the metallic money of the United States, during this
period, consisted mostly of silver coins and largely of foreign coins.
But $11,908,890 of gold altogether were coined from 1793 to 1834,
and this was generally soon exported. The production of gold for
the same period in the United States is given at $14,000,000.

But it should be remembered that this ratio of 15 to 1 was adopted
eleven years before the law of France, enacted in 1803, fixed the
wavering ratio at 15| to 1, at which it stood without variation except
as accounted for by the course of exchange, till 1873.

* Hamilton, the first Secretary of the Treasury, had recommended in his
celebrated report to Congress that tha unit of value should rest on both metals,
and gave as a reason that " To annul the use of either of the metals as money is
io abridge the quantity of circulatinr/ medium, and is liable to all the objections
which arise from a comparison of tbe benefits of a full with the evils of a scanty
ttireulation." (Report to Congress, 179I.J

And Jefferson in a letter to Hamilton, indorsed this view, saying : " I return
you the report on the mint. I concur with you that the unit must stand on both
metals.''' (Letter to Hamilton, February, 1792.)

CHAPTER II.

Coinage Laws From 1792 to 18V3.

The act of May 8, 1792, provided for the purchase of copper, ''not
exceeding one hundred and fifty tons," " to be coined into cents and
half cents," which, by the act of April 2, 1V92, were to contain
respectively eleven, and five and a half, pennyweights. The act of
January 14, 1793, provided that the cent piece should contain 208-
grains of copper and the half cent 104 grains.

The act of February 9, 1793, prescribed the rates at which foreign
gold and silver coins should be legf^l tender in the United States.
This act provided that Spanish milled dollars should be legal tender
"at the rate of 100 cents for each dollar, the actual weight whereof
shall not be less than seventeen pennyweights and seven grains."
Section 2 of this act provided, "That at the expiration of three
years next ensuing the time when the coinage of gold and silver,
agreeably to the act entitled ' An act establishing a mint, and regu-
lating the coins of the United States,' shall commence at the mint of
the United States, (which time shall be announced by the proclama^
tion of the President of the United States,) all foreign gold coins and
all foreign silver coins, except Spanish milled dollars, and parts of
such dollars, shall cease to be a legal tender, as aforesaid."

By this provision it will be seen that, while all other coins were to
be deprived of legal tender, the Spanish milled dollar was to continue
to be a part of the money of the country.

Section 5 of the act of March 3, 1795, provided for the deduc-
tion of two cents per ounce from deposits of silver bullion, when
below the standard of the United States, and four cents per ounce
from gold bullion below the United States standard, to cover the
cost of refining.

Section 7 of this act provided that preference might be given in
coining gold or silver bullion, which came up to the United States
standard, over that which required to be refined.

Section 8 of the same act authorized the President of the United
States to reduce the weight of the copper coin.

The act of February 1, 1798, suspended for three years the act
of February 9, 1793, and made foreign gold and silver coins lega
tender until 1801.

Section 2 of the act of April 24, 1800, provided —

" That there shall be retained from every deposit, in the mint of
gold or silver bullion below the standard of the United States such
sum as shall be equivalent to the expense incurred in refining the
same."

Thus, the only charge made at the mint against either gold or
silver bullion was the cost of refining it, when below the coining
standard.

The act of April 10, 1806, repealed the act of February 9, 1793,.
regulating foreign coins, and provided that "foreign gold and silver
coins shall pass current as money within the United States, and
be a legal tender for the payment of all debts and demands," at
rates provided in the act. Among the coins named was the Spanish
milled dollar. This act also made it the duty of the Secretary of
the Treasury to cause assays of foreign coins to be had at the mint
of the United States each year, and to make a report thereof to-
Con gress.

The act of April 21, 1806, provided penalties for falsifying or coun-
terfeiting coins of the United States, or foreign coins circulating in
the United States.

The act of April 29, 1816, provided that after three years gold
coins of Grreat Britain, France, Portugal and Spain, and the crown»
and five-franc silver pieces of France should not be legal tender.
This act was, however, modified by the act of March 3, 1819, whicl:
provided that from and after the first day of November of that year-
foreign gold coins should cease to be legal tender in the United
States. The French crown and five-franc piece, however, were
continued as legal tender for two years, and were afterwards continued
legal tender till 1823, and again till 1827.

But by the act of March 3, 1823, all foreign gold coins were again
made receivable for public lands. The act of June 25, 1834, made
the dollar piece of Mexico, Peru, Chili and Central America and the
five-franc piece of France legal tender at their nominal value when-
of full weight.

As will appear from the foregoing summary of the coinage laws-
from 1792 to 1834, the coinage of both gold and silver for the benefit
of the holder remained free and unrestricted at the ratio of 15 to 1,.
as established by the act of 1792, and that during this period foreigii
gold and silver coins, at values designated by Congress, continued tt>
be current in the United States.

It is worthy of note too that at no time was the Spanish milled dol-
lar, the prototype of the American standard dollar, barred from circu-
lation or deprived of its legal tender quality.

In 1834 the first change in the ratio of pure metal in the gold and
silver coins of the United States was made.

By the act of June 28, 1834, the pure gold in the gold eagle
was reduced from 247^ grains to 232 grains, and the other gold
pieces were reduced in proportion.

Section 3 of the act changing the weight of gold coins pro-
vided —

''That all gold coins of the United States, minted anterior to the
-31st day of July next shall be receivable in all payments at the rate
of ninety-four and eight-tenths of a cent per pennyweight."

By an act of the same date foreign gold coins were made current
in the United States at the same rate per pennyweight as provided
for United States gold coins, except French gold coins, which being
nine-tenths fine (instead of eleven-twelfths fine, as were our first gold
■and most foreign gold coins,) were made current at the rate of 93.1
cents a pennyweight.

This act of 1834 making the eagle contain 232 grains of pure and
258 grains of standard gold, changed the alloy to very nearly one-
tenth instead of eleven-twelfths. If the pure gold in the eagle
had been made 232.2 grains instead of 232 grains, the proportion of
pure gold to alloy would have been exactly as 9 to 1. The change
to this proportion was made three years later when the French stand-
ard of fineness was adopted for both gold and silver coins, and from
:that date all our gold and silver coins have been nine-tenths fine.

The new gold coins provided for by the act of 1834 were made
legal tender in all payments. The old gold coins, those coined prior
to 1834, as shown above, were made receivable in all payments at
the rate of 94.8 cents per pennyweight, and as the eagle piece con-
tained 270 grains eleven-twelfths fine, or 27 grains of the then
standard gold to the dollar, these coins were, by this act, raised to
11.066.

The ratio of pure gold to pure silver in our coins was made by the
act of 1834, 23.2 to 37 H, or almost exactly 16 to 1. No change was
made in our silver coins by the act of 1834. Why the ratio should
have been changed at this time from 15 to 1, as established in 1792,
to 16 to 1, thirty-one years after the French act of 1803, which had
practically fixe<l the ratio for all Europe at 15A to 1, is difficult to

understand. The reason usually given is that under the ratio of 15
to 1 little or no gold came or stayed here, and new mines of gold
having been discovered in North Carolina and Georgia about this
time, the higher ratio was adopted in order to give the gold a
higher rating relatively to silver, and thereby keep it here.

In the debates in the House, in 183^1, there was some opposition to
the adoption of the ratio of 16 to 1 , but an amendment offered in the
House by Mr. Selden to make the ratio 15.625 to 1, was voted down
by 127 to 52. In the Senate there was but little discussion on the
subject, and but seven votes were cast against the bill. Mr. Ewing,
however, as did Mr. Gorham, of the House, expressed the opinion that
the act rated gold too high, and that the effect would be that silver
coins would leave the country as gold coins had before.

If the ratio fixed in the act of 1Y92 was a mistake, the ratio adopted
by the act of 1834 was a much greater mistake, since, while in 1792,
Europe had not settled on a definite ratio, in 1834 the ratio of 15^ to 1
had been well established for over thirty years. This mistake has
been a grievous stumbling-block in the way of establishing a uni-
form ratio for the different countries.

The discovery of gold in North Carolina and Georgia led to the
establishment, in 1835, of three branch mints, one at New Orleans,
one at Charlotte, N. C, and one at Dahlohnega, Ga.; but except the
mint at New Orleans they were little used.

The act of January 18, 1837, revised the mint laws throughout
and condensed the whole into thirty-eight sections of a new act, which
is known as the mint act of 1837.

Section 8 of this act provided —

''That the standard for both gold and silver coins of the United
States shall hereafter be such that of one thousand parts by weight
nine hundred shall be of pure metal and one hundred of alloy; and
the alloy of the silver coins shall be of copper ; and the alloy of the
gold coins shall be of copper and silver, provided that the silver does
not exceed one-half of the whole alloy."

Section 9 provided —

"That of the silver coins the dollar shall be of the weight of four
hundred and twelve and one-half grains; the half-dollar of the
weight of two hundred and six and one-fourth grains ; the quarter
dollar of the weight of one hundred and three and one-eighth grains;
the dime, or tenth part of a dollar of the weight of forty-one and a
quarter grains; and the half dime or twentieth part of a dollar, of
the weight of twenty grains and five-eighths of a grain. And that

dollars, half dollars, and quarter dollars, dimes, and half dimes,
shall be legal tenders of payment according to their nominal value,
for any sums whatever."

Section 10 provided —

''That of the gold coins, the weight of the eagle shall be twa
hundred and fifty-eight grains ; that of the half eagle one hundred
and twenty-nine grains, and that of the quarter eagle sixty-four and
one-half grains. And that for all suras whatever, the eagle shall be
a legal tender of payment for ten dollars; the half eagle for five
dollars, and the quarter eagle for two and a half dollars."

Section 11 provided —

" That the silver coins heretofore issued at the mint of the United
States, and the gold coins issued since the thirty-first day of July,
one thousand eight hundred and thirty-four, shall continue to oe
legal tenders of payment for their nominal values on the same term*
as if they were of the coinage provided for by this act."

The only change made in the gold coins by this act, from the act
of 1884, was, that by this act the alloy in gold coins as well as in sil-
ver coins was made exactly one-tenth ; that is, the standard for coins
of bath metals was made by this act nine-tenths fine; and since th-
passage of this act standard gold and standard silver is understood to
be gold or silver nine-tenths fine. To bring the alloy in gold coins
to exactly one-tenth of the weight of the coin, the small fraction of
two-tenths of a grain of pure gold was added to the weight of th<}.
eagle, or two-hundredths of a grain to a dollar, and the alloy re-
duced by the same amount; so that the weight of the eagle remained
exactly the same under both acts ; that is, two hundred and fifty-
eight grains for the eagle piece, or twenty-five and eight-tenthcf
grains to the dollar. But by this change ra the relative weight of
pure metal and alloy, the ratio between gold and silver coins was
changed from almost exactly 16 to l,to 15.988+ to l,our present ratio.

After providing for devices, legends, etc., on the various coins,,
section 14 provided —

"That gold and silver bullion brought to the mint for coinage
shall be received and coined, by the proper ofiicers, for the benefit of
the depositor."

It was made lawful by this act to refuse a deposit of less value
than one hundred dollars, or of bullion so base as to be unsuitable
for the mint.

Depositors were to be paid for bullion in coin, and in the order in
which deposits were made.

Sections 15 and 19 provided for weighing deposits in the presence
of the depositor, and for giving a certificate for the net amount
"to be paid in coins of the same species of bullion as that deposited."

Section 18 specified what charges the depositor of bullion should be
subject to. These are: "For refining when the bullion is below
standard," for purifying "when metals are contained in it which
render it unfit for coining," &c. These charges were not to exceed,
however, the cost to the mint of the labor and materials required to
bring the metals to the proper standard.

Hence_, between the act of 1792, establishing the mint, and the act of
1837, no change whatever was made in the silver coins, and the only
change made in these coins by the act of 1837 was the change in the
alloy from 44f grains, as contained in the dollar of the act of 1792,
to 414" grains ; the pure silver being left the same exactly by the act
of 1837 as it was in the original act of 1792.

The pure gold was changed from 24.75 grains to a dollar, as in
the act of 1792, to 23.22 grains, as fixed in the act of 1837.

As three hundred and seventy-one and one-fourth grains is the
weight of pure silver in our present standard dollar, it will be seen
that this unit has therefore never varied in weight of pure metal
through all the changes of our mint laws. It stands to-day the
same dollar it was when our mone}' system was established.

By the act of March 3, 1843, British gold coins were made legal
tender at the rate of 94.6 cents per pennyweight; French gold coins,
nine-tenths fine, were made legal tender at the rate of 92.9 per penny-
weight. By the same act the silver dollars of Mexico, Peru and
Bolivia were made legal tender at their nominal value ; the French
five-franc piece w^as made legal tender for 93 cents.

The act of March 3, 1849, provided for the gold dollar piece to con-
tain 25.8 grains of standard gold, and "to be of the value of one
dollar, or unit." This act also provided for a twenty-dollar piece.

The act of March 3, 1851, provided for coining the three-cent piece
to meet the requirements of the three-cent postage law.

The change in the ratio to 16 to 1, in 1834, while the European ratio
stood at 15^ to 1, led to the exportation of nearly all our full weight sil-
ver coins. For, by this variation in the ratio between the two metals in
the United States and in Europe, full weight silver coins were worth
for export a little more than three per cent, more than our gold coins ;
and as our subsidiary coins contained proportionally the same weight
of pure silver contained in the dollar piece, it was as profitable to
export these coins as the dollar piece ; consequently the country

was well nigh depleted of small coins. To remedy this evil Con-
gress, by the act of February 21, 1853, reduced the weight of the
half dollar from 206^^ grains to 192 grains standard silver, and the
smaller silver coins in proportion. Until this act, fractional silver
coins were legal tender for all sums ; but by this act they were made
legal tender for five dollars only.

Deposits of silver for coinage into fractional pieces for the benefit
of the depositor were no longer received, but provision was made for
the purchase of silver bullion, on Government account, for the fabri-
cation of the light-weight subsidiary coins. The same act provided for
the redemption of subsidiary coins, and for their transmission to
assistant treasurers and depositaries free of charge.

Section 6 of this act provided that depositors might, at their
option, have their gold and silver cast into ingots or bars.

Section 7 of the same act provided for the coinage of the three-
dollar gold piece, which, like the three-cent silver piece, was never
a popular coin.

We come next to the act of February 21, 1857, by which all foreign
coins were deprived of currency in the United States. The old
Spanish quarter, the shilling or eighth, the six pence, or sixteenth
of the Spanish milled dollar, and of the Mexican dollar, which had
passed current for twenty-five, twelve and a half, and six and one-
fourth cents, respectively, were made receivable by the Government
for twenty, ten and five cents, respectively, and when so received
they were to be reminted into American coins.

Section 3 of this act provided —

"That all former acts authorizing the currency of foreign gold or
silver coins, and declaring the same a legal tender in payment for
debts are hereby repealed."

This act also provided for the present form of the cent piece of 72
grains, composed of copper and nickel. The five-cent nickel piece to
take the place of fractional currency and to be a legal tender for one
dollar was provided for by the act of May 16, 1866.

The next act affecting the coinage of the country was the unfor-
tunate act of 1873, which will be made the subject of the next
chapter.

From this summary of the coinage laws of the United States, it will be
seen that, from the foundation ofthe mint down tol873,goldand silver
stood upon a plane of absolute equality as to all rights of mintage and
power of legal tender. The unit rested on both metals alike. No

discrimination whatever was made, in any act, between the two
metals. Holders of gold and silver bullion were allowed, throughout
this period of more than three quarters of a century, without any dis-
crimination whatever, to deposit their metal and have the same
coined for their benefit into the various full legal-tender coins pre-
scribed by Congress, without limit and free of cost, except such
expense as might be incurred by the mint to bring the bullion to the
required standard for coinage.

What all-controlling reason was there for the change made in
1873?

CHAPTER III.

The Act op 18Y3.

It was in 1816, just after the close of the Napoleonic wars, when
nefther gold nor silver were in circulation in England, and when an
^enormous debt had been contracted to carry on her long wars, that
Lord Liverpool secured the adoption of the single gold standard for
England.

So, immediately upon the close of our great war, when an enormous
debt had been created, and when there was neither gold nor silver
in circulation in the country, a movement was quietly begun to cliange
the money standard of the United States from gold and silver to gold
alone, by demonetizing silver.

In 1866 our effective money volume, for a population of little more
than 30,000,000 of people, was 1902,953,635, and consisted entirely
of paper money. The outstanding interest-bearing debt at the same
time was $2,678,126,103.

Let us put these facts side by side — no gold or silver in circulation
in the country, a volume of paper money of over nine hundred millions,
a national debt of nearly three thousand millions, with large State
and municipal debts, created mainly for war purposes, besides vast
corporate and private debts — then ask what there was in the situa-
tion at that time to demand or suggest a change in the money standard
of the United States from gold and silver, as established by the Con-
stitution, to gold alone? Who can consider for a moment this state
of things without astonishment ? That such a time should have been
chosen to increase the money standard is the most unaccountable
event in our whole history. There could have been but one motive,
and that was to increase the enormous debts of the country in the
hands of the holders by raising the standard by which they must be
paid. This debt was created, as is well known, on a paper basis,
far below the level of metallic money ; nor at this time had any
fiteps been taken to return to specie payments. Was it not enough
to pay in coin, debts contracted in paper at fifty to sixty cents on the
dollar? What honest reason could there be for changing the
metallic scale before we had even started to bring our paper money
up to the coin level ?

There certainly is nothing in American history that so severely
reflects upon American statesmanship as the transactions which led
up to the demonetization of silver.

The first public manifestation of a purpose to secure the demoneti-
zation of silver in the United States was given at the International
Conference held at Paris in 1867. The representative from the
JJnited States to that Conference was Samuel B. Ruggles, a member
of the Chamber of Commerce of New York, who, it seems, had pro-
cured an appointment as delegate to that Conference. Mr. Sherman,
of Ohio, who was at this time Chairman of the Finance Committee
of the Senate, appears also by pre-arrangement to have made his way
to Paris, where he was in communication with Mr. Ruggles, and
where his influence was added to that of Mr. Ruggles to induce
the Conference to declare for a single gold standard.

May 17, 1867, Mr. Ruggles advises Mr. Sherman, both being in
Paris, that the Conference was then in session, " to agree, if possible,
on a common unit of money,'* and that the proposition was to adept
as the common unit the French five-franc gold piece, and asked Mr.
Sherman what he thought of such a change. Mr. Sherman replied
on the following day favoring the proposition, and saying: "If
this is done, France will surely abandon the impossible efibrt of mak-
ing two standards of value. ' Gold coins will answer all the pur-
poses of Europe.' " Mr. Sherman's views were communicated by
Mr. Ruggles to the Conference, as those of the chairman of the Senate
Finance Committee.

This letter of Mr. Sherman to Mr. Ruggles affords something of
a key to the mystery surrounding the inception of the gold standard
movement. He speaks of the ^^ impossible" effort of making " two
standards of value," and that at Paris, where the double standard
had been maintained without variation from 1803. It is evident that
Mr. Sherman at this time was imbued with the mischievous idea, which
seemed to dominate all his actions, that gold possessed '' intrinsic "
value, which made it b. fixed standard for the world. At least, it is
charitable to presume that he believed what he stated in his letter to
Mr. Ruggles ; other w^ise he would stand charged with the monstrous
crime of plotting to double the burden of debt of his own country,
then largely held in Europe.

The ignorance of the true theory of money displayed in his advice
to the Paris Conference should, however, have disqualified liim from
having anything further to do with the practical management of the
finances of the country.

But there seems, unfortunately, to have been no one else then promi-
nent in public affairs any better informed on money questions than
Mr. Sherman. For it appears to be a fact, however humiliating to
admit it, that in this country pretty much all knowledge of the
literature on the subject of money had been lost. If there was a
man in public life in the United States at this time who had any cojjh
siderable acquaintance with the literature that arose out of the dis-
cussions of the problems of suspension and resumption in England,
and subsequent measures leading to the Bank Act of 1844, he made
no exhibition of it. Other questions had absorbed the attention of our
people, and then came the war, so that a generation had passed
since the money question had been under discussion in this country,
and all knowledge of the science of money and of the literature on
that subject had been practically lost. We had had men distin-
guished for their knowledge of monetary science, Hamilton, Albert
Gallatin, Conde Raguet, Secretaries Crawford, Hunter and Guthrie ;
but these were of another generation. But if ignorance on the question
of money prevailed in this country, shrewd observers of the situation
were not wanting in other countries.

Men trained in the school of Eicardo well understood that,
with the vast debts created by the American and the Franco-
Prussian wars, if the money standard for the world could be
changed from gold and silver to gold alone, the eifect would be to
enormously enhance the holdings of creditors and creditor nations ;
and at this time our national debt was largely held in Europe. Here
was the motive and here the opportunity. A world was open to
plunder. Nothing could be plainer. It were folly to attempt to
disguise either the motive or the opportunity. But morally con-
sidered the change in the money standard, at such a time and for
such a purpose, was simply an act of spoliation, no more justifiable in
the abstract than theft or piracy. That the demonetization of silver
did alter the money standard by changing it from both gold and
silver to gold alone, is too well understood now to be questioned hj
anybody ; that the object of changing the standard was to enable the
creditor class and creditor nations to exact, under the form of law,
what they had no shadow of claim to in equity, is too apparent, also,
" to admit of denial. The effect was what was forecalculated and in-
tended. The demonetization of silver increased the value of gold, and
made gold itself a different standard from what it would have been
with silver circulating side by side with it. The change in the money

standard thus effected added, at one stroke, fifty per cent, to the debt
burden of the United States. It not only increased the burden of
public debts, but it increased every private debt and changed the obli-
gations involved in all time contracts that had been entered into
between man and man.

It was the most monstrous piece of injustice ever enacted into law,
and it is with shame that, as American citizens, we have to admit
that in this transaction our statesmen were completely outwitted.

The influence which led up to this crime against the American
people came from the banking circles of London, Frankfort and
Berlin, operating first through the foreign banks of New York and
from them to other banks. They stood together in this scheme for
plunder and controlled the metropolitan press of both continents.
They harped continually on such catch-phrases as " honest money,"
"cheap money," ''the best money," "light-weight dollar," and
other like phrases, to delude the public and bring to their side the
religious press of the country. Instinctively, the credit-holding
class everywhere understood enough to know that whatever dimin-
ished the volume of money would tend to increase their holdings.

The Origin of the Act of 1873.

In June, 1868, the year following the Paris Conference, Mr.
Sherman made a report to the United States Senate in favor of "a
single standard, exclusively of gold."

In the same year Mr. Sherman introduced a bill in the Senate —
Senate bill 217 — having for its object the establishment of a single
standard, " exclusively of gold " with silver to be coined on Govern-
ment account only, for subsidiary purposes, the coins being made to
conform to the weight of the silver coins of France. This bill
was accompanied by a report of some length recommending a reduc-
tion of the weight of the gold dollar to 24.89 grains.

Again in April 28, 1870, Mr. Sherman introduced a bill in the
Senate "revising the laws relating to the mints, assay offices and
coinage of the United States," which was referred to the Finance
Committee.

This bill was accompanied by a letter from Secretary Boutwell, in
which he states that there had been no revision of the laws pertain-
ing to the mint and coinage since 1837, and that " the passage of the
inclosed bill" would "conduce to the efficiency and economy of this

Important branch of the Government service." He also inclosed a
report from Deputy Comptroller Knox, all of wiiich were printed.

Various other reports and recommendations from subordinate offi-
fcials of the Treasury Department and the Mint, seem to have gone
along together with the original bill, to the two Houses ; but there
was nothing that showed the slightest comprehension of the eco-
nomic effect of dropping the silver dollar or of demonetizing silver.

On the 19th of December, 1870, Mr. Sherman reported the bill
back to the Senate with some amendments, one making a charge for
coinage. There was some debate on the proposed charge for coinage,
but on no other featuve of the bill.

The bill was voted on in committee January 9, 18*71, and carried
with the amendment providing for a charge for coinage, by 26 to 22 ;
but on the following day a vote- was taken in the Senate and the vote
in the committee was reversed and the coinage charge stricken out.
The bill was then passed by 36 to 14, Mr. Sherman, who had voted
for the amendment in committee, voting against the bill on its final
passage.

The Bill in the House.

The bill as it passed the Senate went to the House, and, January
11, 1871, was referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and
Measures.

On the 25th of February, Mr. Kelley reported the bill back to the
House with certain amendments.

In the Forty-second Congress, extra session, March 9, 1871, Mr.
Kelley reintroduced the same bill, to go to the Committee on Coinage,
Weights and Measures, " when appointed."

At the second session (first regular session), January 9, 1872, Mr.
Kelley reported the bill back to the House without amendment.

In explaining the bill Mr. Kelley said : " It is a measure origi-
nated by the Treasury Department. The mint laws of this country
have never been revised ;" and went on to explain the difficulty of
administering the affairs of the mint and the necessity of a codifica-
tion of the laws, and stated that a "commission of learned gentlemen"
had been appointed to carefully arrange the details of the mint
regulations. He spoke of the attention given to the subject by the
previous Congress, but said "the bill has not received the same
elaborate consideration from the Committee on Coinage, Weights
and Measures of this House, but the attention of each member was
brought to it," &c.

This admission of Mr. Kelley on the floor of the House, on first
reporting the bill, may help to explain the answers he made to the
questions asked him by Mr. Potter, of New York :

'•Mr. Potter. I desire, in the first place, to ask the gentleman
who has this bill in charge whether, if it becomes a law, it will make
any change in the value of the coin issued pursuant to its provisions
from the value of the coin which now exists ?"

" Mr. Kelley. It does not."

" Mr. Potter. Does it make any change in the standard of weight
or of fineness of the coin ? "

" Mr. Kelley. It does not."

"Mr. Potter. Does it provide for any new kind of coin ; coin of
any new denomination other than that which is now coined?"

" Mr. Kelley. It does not."

A careful examination, however, of the bill at this stage shows
that Mr. Kelley was mistaken, and that he did not understand him-
Belf all that the bill he was reporting contained. In his own re-
marks respecting the bill he had confined himself mainly to the
parts relating to the Mint.

There was some discussion about the salary of the Director of the
Mint, when the bill was recommitted to the Committee on Coinage,
Weights and Measures.

From this time on Mr. Kelley seems to have left the bill to Mr.
Hooper, of Massachusetts. On the 8th of February, 1872, Mr.
Hooper introduced bill No. 1427 (see page 943 of the Globe of Feb-
ruary 9). On the 13th of February the bill was reported from the
committee with amendments, recommitted and printed (see page 1004,
Globe of February, 1872).

Mr. Neely claimed that the committee had not been together and
had not authorized the bill to be reported.

On the 9th of April the bill was called up, and a long explanatory
speech made on it by Mr. Hooper, to which, it would seem from
subsequent events, no one listened and which no one understood.

On the 27th of May Mr. Hooper called the bill up again and
offered a substitute (H. R. 2934) which he said had been ''carefully
prepared" and which he had submitted to "different gentlemen
interested in the subject," and " it meets with universal approbation
in the form in which I offer it."

Mr. Hooper then moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill.

Mr. Holman said :

" I suppose it is intended to have the bill read before it is put
upon its passage ?"

''The Speaker. The substitute will be read."

"Mr. Hooper, of Massachusetts. I hope not. It is a long bill, and
those who are interested in it are perfectly familiar with its j)ro-
Tisions."

" Mr. Kerr, of Indiana. The rules cannot be suspended so as to
dispense with the reading of the bill."

" The Speaker. They can be,"

" Mr. Kerr. I want the House to understand that it is attempted to
put through this bill without being read."

After some intervening business Mr. Hooper moved that the rules
be suspended and the bill passed, which was carried — yeas, 110;
nays, 13 ; the yeas and nays not being recorded.

Although Mr. Hooper, in his prepared speech, referred to the
change in the unit and in the weight of the dollar, it is doubtful if
half a dozen members understood even this much, and probably not
one comprehended the real economic effect of the measure.

As Professor Loughlin states, in his History of Bimetallism in the
United States : " The Senate occupied its time chiefly on questions of
seigniorage and abrasion and the House on a question of the salaries
of the officials."

The Bill as it Passed the House.

In order to get at a correct understanding of the responsibility of
each House for the passage of this act it is important to know just
what the bill contained when it passed the House.

As it passed the House the bill contained sixty-eight sections,
(reduced to sixty-seven in the Senate), and contained a full revision
of the laws relating to the Mint.

The parts of the act which bear evidence of a concealed purpose
are —

First. The following words in section 14: "The gold coins of the
United States shall be a one-dollar piece, which, at the standard
weight of twenty-five and eight-tenths grains, shall he the unit of
value."

In every act prior to this the language respecting the unit of value
was made to apply equally to dollars of gold and of silver. Who first
proposed this change has never come to light. Did the one who pro-
posed it know its far-reaching consequences? Undoubtedly he who
devised it understood its full significance. Was he an American ?
That is hardly probable, although Arnold was an American.

Second. Section 16 of the act, as it passed the House (15 of the
Senate), provided "that the silver coins of the United States shall be a ^

dollar, a half-dollar or fifty-cent piece, a quarter-dollar or tweaty-five-
cent piece, and a dime or ten-cent piece ; and the weight of the dollar
shall be three hundred and eighty-four grains ; the half-dollar, quarter
dollar, and the dime shall be, respectively, one-half, one-quarter, and
one-tenth of the weight of said dollar ; which coins shall be a legal
tender, at their nominal value, for any amount not exceeding Jive
dollars in any one payment."

So that in the bill as it passed the House the old dollar of
412^ grains was dropped out, and a dollar of 384 grains (equal
to the French five-franc piece) was substituted in its place. This
dollar, however, was to be a legal tender for only five dollars,
and to be coined only on Government account. But the most
remarkable thing connected with this proposed new dollar was,
that, inasmuch as the weight of the gold dollar was not to be
changed,* the change in the weight of the silver dollar from 412^
grains to 384 grains, changed the ratio between gold and silver from
16 to 1, to 14.8 to 1 ; thus greatly overrating silver and underrat-
ing gold. If, with this change of ratio, the coinage of silver had
been left free we would very quickly have had an exclusively silver
currency in this country. This is manifestly not what those who de-
vised the scheme intended, and hence its legal-tender function was
limited to five dollars.

Third. Section 22 of the bill as it passed the House contained
the following provision :

"Section 22 (21 of the Senate). That any owner of silver bullion
may deposit the same at any mint, to be formed into bars for his benefit ;
no deposit for coinage into silver coin shall be received."

This provision in the House bill took away the right to have silver
coined for the benefit of the depositor, a right that had existed from
the foundation of the Government. He could have it formed into bars
butnotinto coins. The substitution of the word "bars" for " coins "
destroyed free coinage. Anyone could have silver formed into bars
but no longer made into money.

Thus we see that, as the bill passed the House, it contained four
things, which, taken together, (1) placing the unit on gold only ; (2)
dropping the old dollar of 412^ grains and substituting a dollar of 384

*In a report on his bill, introduced in 1868, Mr. Sherman recommended a reduc-
■feion in the weight of the gold dollar from 25.8 grains to 24.89 grains, the purpose
being to make both our gold and silver coins conform in weight to the coins of
France, which would have fixed the ratio at 15o ; but no such provision was
talked of in connection with this bill.

grains ; (3) limiting the legal-tender function of the new dollar to five
dollars, and (4) taking away from silver the right of free coinage.
And, strange as it may seem, all this passed unnoticed and appar-
ently without anyone in Congress knowing what was being accom-
plished, and certainly without anybody in the country understanding
what was going on.

A few Grovernment officials, of a classVho have always considered
themselves agents of the banks and other moneyed interests rather than
of the people of the United States, were the only persons in the country ^
out of its entire population, who took an active interest in this
measure. Among these officials were Dr. Linderman, Director of the
Mint, and John J. Knox, Comptroller of the Currency. As evidenced
by their writings before and since, neither of these officers, however^
possessed a thorough knowledge or sound views on money questions,
but they were ardent workers in getting through Congress this
juggling scheme. It has been stated on good authority, however,
that Dr. Linderman, before his death, expressed his regret at the
part he had taken,

Mr. Knox, who has recently laid claim to the principal credit for
this act, seems never to have comprehended its true significance. If
the real truth were known it would doubtless appear that both of
these gentlemen, as well as the Secretary of the Treasury and the
chairman of the Finance Committee of the Senate, were used as blind
tools to work out the scheme devised by men who well knew what the
far-reaching consequences would be.

The Bill in the Senate.

The bill, as it passed the House, went to the Senate, May 28, and
was referred to the Committee on Finance, of which Mr. Sherman
was chairman.

On the 16th of December, the bill was reported back to the Senate
with various amendments. The amendments were printed January "7,
1873, and were considered in the usual manner in the Senate, except
section 16, of the House bill. This section, as before stated, pro-
vided for a dollar of 384 grains^ intended to be the equivalent of the
five-franc piece of France.

The committee recommended that this section be stricken out, and
the following, which now constitutes section 3513 of the Eevised
Statutes, substituted in its place:

"Section 3513. The silver coins of the United States shall be a
trade dollar, a half-dollar, or fifty-cent piece, a quarter-dollar, or
twenty-five-cent piece, a dime, or ten-cent piece; and the weight of

the trade dollar shall be four hundred and twenty grains troy; the
weight of the half-dollar shall be twelve grams and one-half of a
gram; the quarter-dollar and the dime shall be, respectively, one-half
and one-fifth of the weight of said half dollar."

These coins were all alike made legal tender for five dollars.

The only change of importance here is the substitution of the
trade dollar for the dollar of 384 grains, as in the House bill.

Senator Stewart, in his speech in the Senate, June 5, 1890, shows
that no action whatever was taken in the Senate on the recommen-
dation of the committee respecting section 16 of the House bill, but
that after acting on section 15 of the bill, the next amendment to
the House bill considered in the Senate was section 17. The amend-
ment to section IT, however, related only to minor coins and was
adopted without debate. Some other unimportant amendments were
considered, such as the devices and inscriptions on the coins.

It should be noted that in the amendments of the Senate, the number
of the sections of the House bill stood all the way one number higher
than the number of the same sections in the Senate bill. Thus, section
16 of the House bill was carried as number 15 in the Senate bill. • The
amendment to section 19 of the House bill, or 18 of the Senate bill,
proposed to omit the eagle on the silver coins and to prescribe in
lieu thereof " the weight and fineness of the metal," and also, for the
inscription, "In God we trust." Was this to cloak the contem-
plated fraud with a pious mask?

Senator Stewart, in the speech referred to, shows that the substi-
tute for section 16 of the House bill was never read or acted upon in
the Senate ; at any rate, that there is no record of any such action.
Certainly there was no discussion whatever on the proposition to
drop out the old dollar, or to include the trade-dollar.

The provision for the trade dollar, in lieu of the proposed French
dollar, is as unaccountable on any rational theory of money as are the
other parts of the bill. The pretense (and it can be treated only as
a pretense on the supposition that the framers of the bill knew what
they were doing) that by making our dollar piece a iittle larger we
would get more per ounce for our silver, was too shallow to deceive
any but those entirely ignorant of the laws governing the precious
metals.

It is well known that gold and silver is valued in every country
according to its weight and fineness, and therefore all the silver ex-
ported in the form of trade-dollars brought us not a single penny's
worth of anything more than the same weight of silver brought us

in the form of the old standard dollar, or, for that matter, any of the
other silver coins. There never was a time when 101^ standard dol-
lars would not buy as much in any country as one hundred trade-
dollars, for the simple reason that 101^ standard dollars contained
as much silver as one hundred trade-dollars contained.

To sum up the provisions of the act as it passed the House, and
as it passed the Senate, and as afterwards amended in conference
committee, it will be seen that section 14 of the act as it passed the
House contained the insidiou.? provision, "That the gold coins of
the United States shall be a one-dollar piece, which, at the standard
weight of 25.8 grains, shall he the unit of value." While in all laws
before, the unit, as shown in the foregoing chapters, had rested on
both metals.

Section 22 of the House bill (21 of the Senate), as already quoted,
limited the right of the owner of silver to have it formed into any-
thing but bars. He could no longer have it formed into coins
for his benefit, which showed the cunning hand of somebody in the
bill as it originally passed the House.

This section (22) was changed in conference to read as follows:

"That any owner of silver bullion may deposit the same at any
mint to be formed into bars or into dollars of the iveight of four hun-
dred and tioenty grains troy, designated in this act as trade-dollars,
and no deposit of silver for other coinage shall be received."

As will be seen this amendment permitted silver to be coined
into trade-dollars for the benefit of the depositor; but, as the legal-
tender limit was $5, this privilege was practically of little value,
and by subsequent legislation, the right to have silver coined into
trade-dollars and the legal-tender quality of the coin, were both
taken away.

The report of the conference which contained the above amend-
ment was agreed to without debate, February 12, 1873, and thus
was accomplished the most gigantic financial fraud ever perpetrated
upon any people — an act that must stand in history as the crime of
the age.

One searches in vain the records of the two Houses of Congress to
find in the debates any reference whatever to the proposition to de-
monetize silver and limit money supply to one metal, or to lead any-
body to suppose that a change was to be made in the money standard
from gold and silver to gold alone ; much less that the effect of the
bill would be, after establishing the single gold standard, to raise

that standard by increasing the value of gold. The bill occupied
but little time in either House, and what discussion took place was
principally over minor matters.

Nothing could better show the indifference manifested respect-
ing this momentous act than what Mr. Sherman said when he
ealled the bill up in the Senate, January 17^ 1873 —

'' The Presiding Officer. The calendar under the Anthony rule is
now in order."

"Mr. Sherman : I rise for the purpose of moving that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of the mint bill. I will state that this
bill will not probably consume any more time than the time con-
sumed in reading it. It passed the Senate two years ago after full
debate. It was taken up again in the House during the present
Congress, and passed there. It is a matter of vital interest to the
Government, and I am informed by officers of the Government it is
important it should pass promptly. The amendments reported by
the Committee on Finance present the points of difference between the
two Houses, and they can go to a committee of conference without
having a controversy here in the Senate about them.'"^

In discussing the proposition to make a silver coin of exactly the
weight of the five-franc piece, Mr. Sherman said :

" This bill proposes a silver coinage exactly the same as the French,
and what are called the associated nations of Europe, who have
adopted the international standard of silver coinage; that is, the
dollar provided for by this bill is the precise equivalent of the five-
franc piece."

The following extract from the debate in the Senate indicates also
something of the purpose and the influences that led to the passage of
the act :

*' Mr. Sherman. If the Senator will allow me, he will see that the
preceding section provides for coin which is exactly interchangeable
with the English shilling and the five-franc piece of France ; that
i«, a five-franc piece of France will be the exact equivalent of a dol-
lar of the United States in our silver coinage ; and in order to show •
this wherever our silver coin shall float — and we are providing that
it shall float all over the world — we propose to stamp upon it, in-
stead of our eagle, which foreigners may not understand, and which
they may not distinguish from a buzzard or some other bird, the in-
trinsic fineness and weight of the coin. In this practical, utilitarian
age the officers of the Mint seemed to think it would be better to do
that than to put the eagle on our silver coins. I must confess I do not
think it is very imj)ortant ; but I think the Senator ought to be will-

*Those who care to read the entire discussions on this bill in the Senate will
find it in Senator Stewart's speech of June 5, 1880.

ing to defer in these matters to the practical knowledge of the offi-
cers who have charge of this branch of the Government service. I
will say that Mr. Linderman, whom the Senator must know, has
suggested this as being a convenient mode of promoting international
coinage.''

" Mr. Casserly. We cannot have an international coinage on the
basis of our silver coin unless our silver coin is up to the standard of
all the nations with which we expect to have relations. Now, I ask
the Senator whether this bill proposes a silver coinage of that char-
acter."

" Mr. Sherman. This bill proposes a silver coinage exactly the same
as the French, and what are called the associated nations of Europe,
who have adopted the international standard of silver coinage ; that
is, the dollar provided for by this bill is the precise equivalent of the
five-franc piece. It contains the same number of grams of silver;
and we have adopted the international gram instead of the grain for
the standard of our silver coinage. The ' trade-dollar ' has been
adopted mainly for the benefit of the people of California, and others
engaged in trade with China. That is the only coin measured by
the grain instead of by the gram. The intrinsic value of each is to
be stamped upon the coin."

''Mr. Casserly. Do I understand the Senator to say, then, that
the intrinsic value of the dollar, half-dollar, and quarter-dollar is
raised by this bill?"

"Mr. Sherman. There is a difierence of about one-half of 1 per
cent."

"Mr. Casserly. I suppose it must be raised to the basis of inter-
national exchange."

''Mr. Sherman. I think it is slightly raised, so as to conform
with foreign coins. The Chamber of Commerce of New York first
recommended this change, and it has been adopted, I believe, by all
the learned societies who have given attention to coinage, and has
been recommended to us I believe as the general desire. That is
embodied in these three or four sections of amendment, to make our
silver coinage correspond in exact form and dimensions, and shape and
•stamp, with the coinage of the associated nations of Europe, who have
adopted an international silver coinage'. I do not like myself to break
in upon this plan or to change it in the slightest degree, but prefer
to leave it to the proper officers of the Mint. Indeed, I would be per-
fectly willing to leave the whole thing to the officers of the Minfe
rather than to fix it by law. That was not deemed convenient, and
therefore we had to drop the American eagle from these minor silver
coins."

Did Mr. Sherman supi30se that a coin on the ratio to gold of 14.8
to 1, and legal-tender for but five dollars, would be a coin that would
float all over the world ? What folly 1

As no reference whatever was made in the debates in the Senate to

the provision in section 14, by which the unit was restricted to gold,
and none to section 22 of the House bill, which took away the
right to have silver coined for the benefit of the depositor, thereby
putting an end to free coinage ; the query has been often made who,
if anyone, knew the bill contained these provisions, and who, if any-
one, knew or understood the necessary economic eifect of these pro-
visions. Mr. Sherman, as chairman of the Finance Committee of the
Senate, and the head of the conference committee, undoubtedly knew
that the act contained these provisions ; but did he have any concep-
tion of their necessary economic effect upon the country ? Did he
realize that, by demonetizing silver, the value of gold would be
increased the world over, and thereby the enormous debt of the
country greatly augmented ? Did he comprehend that the necessary
effect of such a change in the money standard as the act compassed,
would violate the equities involved in all public and private obliga-
tions?

It is but charitable to presume that he did not know this, and that
this act, so far as our statesmen were concerned, was not a crime
outright but an egregious blunder. But Mr. Sherman has not yet
said which horn of the dilemma he chose to take. Other mem-
bers of the Senate and members of the House, as will appear from
quotations that follow, have frankly stated their relations to this
unfortunate act. But it will bear to be repeated that somebody did
know what the act contained, and that its economic effect would b€
just what it was intended it should be, and just what it has been. Mr.
Hooper, in the debate in the House, April 19, 1872, let drop a remark
which may help to explain the origin of the deep-laid plot to change
the money standard of the United States and, if possible, of the
■world.

The following is Mr. Hooper's admission :

"Mr. Ernest Seyd, of London, a distinguished writer, who has
given great attention to mints and coinage, after examining the
first draft of the \)\\\, furnished many valuable suggestions, which have
been incorporated in this bill."

It would be interesting to know just what parts of the bill Mr. Seyd
'' furnished." It is hardly probable that he came all the way from
England to make suggestions about the practical running of our mints
or about devices on our coins, for what difference did it make to an
Englishman whether the image on our coins was an eagle or a
buzzard? Nor is it likely that he came all the way to the United

States to suggest that the inscription " In God we trust" be placed
on our coins. There were things, however, in the bill that did
concern Englishmen, and did concern holders of our bonds every-
where. Is it not reasonable to presume that the parts so generously
''furnished" by Mr. Seyd to the House committee were the cunningly-
devised parts of sections 14, 16, and 22, which demonetized silver
and set up the gold standard ? *

Is not the whole history of this act most humiliating to us as a
people, and does it not justify the witty characterization of the trans-
action made at the St. Louis silver convention by the Hon. Thomas
Fitch, of Nevada, when he said :

"That nation which consumes 50 percent, and produces but 7 per
cent, of the world's supply of silver, beguiled the nation which pro-
duces nearly 50 per cent, and consumes 25 per cent, of the world's
supply of silver into a conspiracy to strike 35 per cent, from the value
of silver ! That nation which is the greatest importer of wheat in
the world, inveigled the nation which is the greatest exporter of
wheat in the world into a financial and commercial dead fall where
35 per cent, was taken from the value of wheat. The nation whose
looms would be idle, and whose people would be hungry, and whose
government would be upheaved upon a storm of riot if without a supply
of American cotton, deceived the nation which is the greatest pro-
ducer of cotton into striking 35 per cent, from the value of cotton.
Why, gentlemen, England is the bunco-steerer of the world. [Ap-
plause.] And Uncle Sam the gentleman from the rural districts."
[Applause.]

And is it not strange that this wrong was committed in 1873
against a people having full control of their government, and that
they have not yet righted the wrong?

Explanations of Senators and Representatives.

The following extracts from admissions of distinguished Senators
and Representatives concerned in the passage of the act of 1873,
show better than anything that can be said by others, how and why
the act was passed.

In a discussion which took place in the first session of the Fiftieth.
Congress between Mr. Beck and Mr. Sherman, Mr. Beck said :

" Mr. Beck. What I complain of, and what I think I have proved,
is that the House never knew wliat was in that bill.

* * * * nii « 1^

*Mr. SeyJ, it is true, became afterwards an able advocate of bimetallism, but for
what else was he sent to Washington at this time ?

" I need not waste time in regard to what took place when the
House bill reached the Senate. The Senator from Nevada [Mr. Stew-
art] has shown very fully what took place there. If the Senator
from Ohio is content with that statement I am. Mr. Casserly, of
California, was in the Senate and other able and distinguished rep-
resentatives of silver-producing States. Mr. Corbett, of Oregon, and
others took part in the debate. Will any sane man believe that they
deliberately consented to strike down silver coinage ? Mr. Sherman
Bays they all did. I do not believe him. When the House bill was
brought up by Mr. Sherman the record shows that he used this lan-
guage :

" ' Mr. Sherman. I rise for the purpose of moving that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of the Mint bill. I will state that this
bill will not probably consume any more time than the time con-
sumed in reading it. It passed the Senate two years ago after full
debate. It was taken up again in the House during the present
Congress and passed there. It is a matter of vital interest to the
Government, and I am informed by officers of the Government it is
important it should pass promptly. The amendments reported by
the Committee on Finance present the points of difference between
the two Houses, and they can go to a committee of conference with-
out liaving a controversy here in the Senate about them.'

" Again he said :

" ' If the Senator will allow me, he will see that the preceding
section provides for coin which is exactly interchangeable with the
English shilling and the five-franc piece of France ; that is, a five-
franc piece of France will be the exact equivalent of a dollar of the
United States in our silver coinage.' "

That was stricken out, and there was no such thing left in the
bill.

" ' And in order to show this wherever our silver coin shall float —
and we are providing that it shall float all over the world — we pro-
pose to stamp upon it, instead of our eagle, which foreigners may
not understand, and which they may not distinguish from a buzzard
or some other bird, the intrinsic fineness and weight of the coin. In
this practical, utilitarian age the officers of the Mint seemed to think
it would be better to do that than to put the eagle on our silver coins.
I must confess I do not think it is very important, but I think the
Senator ought to be willing to defer in these matters to the practical
knowledge of the officers who have charge of this branch of the
Government service. I will say that Mr. Linderman, whom the
Senator must know, has suggested this as being a convenient mode
of promoting international coinage.'

"Did not every word of that indicate the continuance of silver
coinage with full legal-tender quality as it had always had ?

" International coinage in a trade-dollar, with a legal-tender qual-
ity of only |5, and even that poor quality was stricken out in 1875,

so as to make it simply merchandise. That toas the coin the Sen-
ator from Ohio said was to float, and they luere providing it should
float, all over the world, loherever our flag floated, and that it should
be international coinage equivalent to the coins of other nations.
Little wonder the Senator from Nevada said to him : ' Whatever
may be your construction of the meaning now, the words used then
induced me to vote with you, because you made me believe that you
were sending out a bona fide silver dollar as good as any in the
world.' The Senate so believed. The debate showed that Mr. Cas-
serly announced that Nevada alone was then producing $20,000,000
of silver, and the question was as to whether silver owners should
pay the coinage charge of half, a quarter, or one-eighth per cent.;
nothing was suggested anywhere that the silver dollar was to be
stricken down. The Senator from Ohio vias as silent as the grave on
that subject."

Judge Kelley, of Pennsylvania, was chairman of the Committee
on Coinage, Weights and Measures in 1872 when the bill originally
passed the House. This is what he said on the floor of the House
March 9, 1878 :

"In connection with the charge that I advocated the bill which
demonetized the standard silver dollar, I say that, though the
chairman of the Committee on Coinage, 1 was as ignorant of the fact
that it would demonetize the silver dollar or of its dropping the silver
dollar from our system of coins as were those distinguished Senators,
Messrs. BlaineandVoorhees, who were then members of the House, and
each of whom a few days since interrogated the other : 'Did you know
it was dropped when the bill passed?' 'No,' said Mr. Blaine;
'did you?' 'No,' said Mr. Voorhees. I do not think that there
were three members in the House that knew it. I doubt whether Mr.
Hooper, who, in my absence from the Committee on Coinage and at-
tendance on the Committee of Ways and Means, managed the bill,
knew it. I say this injustice to him." — (Congressional Record, vol-
ume 7, part 2, Forty-fifth Congress, second session, page 1605.)

Again on May 10, 1879, Mr. Kelley said:

"All I can say is that the Committee on Coinage, Weights and
Measures, who reported the original bill, were faithful and able, and
scanned its provisions closely; that as their organ I reported it; that
it contained provision for both the standard silver dollar and the
trade-dollar. Never having heard until a long time after its enact-
ment into law of the substitution in the Senate of the section which
dropped the standard dollar, I profess to know nothing of its history;
but I am prepared to say that in all the legislation of this country
there is no mystery equal to the demonetization of the standard silver
dollar of the United States. I have never found a man who could
tell just how it came about or why." — {Congressional Record, volume
9, part 1, Forty-sixth Congress, first session, page 1231.)

And again:

''^In 1872, when I made the remarks which were cited by those
gentlemen, and which have been frequently quoted in both Houses,
and always with an air as much as to sa3'^that to convict this man of
ihe crime of having been instructed by the logic of events would
forever settle this momentous question, we were not using coin, and
no gentleman in either House appears to have appreciated the scope
and magnitude of the silver question or to have given it special
study. Hence the bill — and I wish gentlemen to know what that
bill was; it was a bill to reorganize the mints, not to revise the coin
money of the country, but reorganize the mints, and it was passed
without allusion in debate to the question of the retention or aban-
donment of the standard silver dollar. The then Speaker of the
House, now a distinguished member of the Senate, and Hon. Mr.
Voorhees, of Indiana, who is also a member of that body, were then
members of this House, and during the last Congress this colloquy
occurred between them. It was, I think, denied by Mr. Voorhees
ihat members of the House knew that the bill proposed to demonetize
the silver dollar, and to sustain his view he said to the ex-Speaker:
*Did you know it, sir?' 'No,' said Senator Blaine, * did you?*
'No,' replied Senator Voorhees.

" I was chairman of the committee that reported the original bill,
and I aver on my honor that I did not know the fact that it proposed
to drop the standard dollar, and did not learn that it had done it for
eighteen months after the passage of the substitute offered by Mr.
Hooper, when I disputed the fact. The distinguished gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. G-arfield] who now leads this side of the House was
then as now an attentive and already a distinguished member of the
House; yet when in joint debate before the people of Ohio in October,
1877, the question arose as to who was responsible for it>i demoneti-
sation, he frankly said he did not know that such a provision was in
the bill when it passed the House. I state this the more freely in his
absence because I informed him that I intended to do so; and he re-
plied, 'It is the case; I did make that statement, and it is true.' "

Mr. Holman, in a speech delivered in the House of Representatives
July 13, 1876, said:

"I have before me the record of the proceedings of this House on
the passage of that measure, a record which no man can read with-
out being convinced that the measure and the method of its passage
through this House was a 'colossal swindle ' I assert that the meas-
ure never had the sanction of this House, aad it does not possess the
moral force of law." {Oongressional Record, volume 4, part 6,
Forty-fourth Congress, first session, appendix, page 193.)

Again on August 5, 1876, he said :

" The original bill was simply a bill to organize a bureau of mines
and coinage. The bill which finally passed the House and which
ultimately became a law was certainly not read in this House.
********

''It was never considered before the House as it was passed. Up-
to the time the bill came before this House for final passage the
measure had simply been one to establish a bureau of mines ; I be-
lieve I use the term correctly now. It came from the Committee on
Coinage, Weights and Measures. The substitute Avhich finally be-
came a law was never read, and is subject to the charge made against
it by tlije gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Bland], that it was passed
by the House without a knowledge of its provisions, especially upoa
that of coinage.

"I myself asked the question of Mr. Hooper, who stood near
where I am now standing, whether it changed the law in regard to
coinage. And the answer of Mr. Hooper certainly left the impres-
sion upon the whole House that the subject of the coinage was not
affected by that bill," {Congressional Record, volume 4, part 6y
Forty-fourth Congress, first session, page 5237.)

Mr. Cannon, of Illinois, in a speech made in the House on July
13, 1876, said :

" This legislation was had in the Forty-second Congress, Febru-
ary 12, 1873, by a bill to regulate the mints of the United States^
and practically abolished silver as money by failing to provide for
the coinage of the silver dollar. It was not discussed, as shown by
the Record, and neither members of Congress nor the people under-
stood the scope of the legislation." — {Ibid., appendix, page 197.)

Senator Bogy, of Missouri, uttered the following words in a speech,
made in the Senate June 27, 1876:

'' Why the act of 1873, which forbids the coinage of the silver
dollar was passed no one at this day can give a good reason." — {Con-
gressional Record, volume 4, part 5, Forty-fourth Congress, first ses-
sion, page 4178.)

Mr. Burchard, of Illinois, in a speech made in the House of Rep-
resentatives on July 13, 1876, said:

"The coinage act of 1873, unaccompanied by any written report
upon the subject from any committee, and unknown to the member*
ot Congress who, without opposition allowed it to pass under the be-
lief, if not assurance, that it made no alteration in the value of the
current coins, changed the unit of value from silver to gold." — {Ibid.y
page 4560.)

Senator Conkling, in the Senate, March 30, 1876, during the
remarks of Senator Bogy on the bill (S. 263) to amend the laws re-
lating to the legal-tender of silver coin^ in surprise, inquired :

" Will the Senator allow me to ask him or some other Senator a
question? Is it true that there is now by law no American dollar?
And, if so, is it true that the effect of this bill is to be to make half-
dollars and quarter-dollars the only silver coin which can be used as-
a legal tender?"

The reply of Mr. Sherman to this question of Mr. Conkling is most
remarkable, as coming from the chairman of the Finance Committee.

Mr. Sherman said : " I will answer the Senator from New York,
that since 1853 the use of the silver whole dollar has been discon-
tinued, and none has been issued. That has been so since 1853."

Mr. Conkling insisting on knowing ifit was really true that there was
''noiv by law no American dollar,*' asked if there was power to issue it?

Mr. Sherman replied : There is no power, and has been none.

Mr. Bogy. The power to issue existed from 1853 to 1873, but
since 1873 I think there has been no power.

Mr. Sherman. ''There has been no silver dollar issued since 1853,
and my impression is that the law of 1853 did not confer the power,
but the law of 1873 cut off the power, in my judgment, if it existed."

" If it existed," said Mr. Sherman, who did not seem to know
whether the right to coin silver had existed in the United States
since 1853 or not ; while the fact is over ^2,500,000 standard dol-
lars were coined at our mints from 1871 to 1873.

Mr. Jones, of Nevada, answered Mr. Conkling's question as follows :

" Mr. Jones, of Nevada. The law of 1853 authorized the coinage
of the silver dollar, and it was never demonetized until February,
1873; but it needed no law to prevent people from coining such a
dollar for use in business, when there was another dollar to be got
three or four per cent, cheaper. The people*did in 1853 and up to
1873 have an option that if gold should become dearer they could
fall back on the silver dollar. In 1873 that privilege was taken
away." — (See Congressional Record, volume 4, part 3, Forty-fourth
Congress, first session.)

On the 25th of April of this same year, Mr. Sherman made another
statement respecting the effect of the act of 1873, which, when
placed side by side with what he said on the 30th of March, reads
very strangely, and it becomes unaccountable after the answer
which Senator Jones made to Mr. Sherman's statement on March
30th, abore quoted. The following is what the Record shows Mr.
Sherman to have said April 25, only twenty-six days after his
statement given above :

" The act of 1873 did not in the slightest degree demonetize
silver. * * * The right to coin the silver dollar, which is now
proposed to be authorized again, has always existed in this country ;
has never been taken away. It is the legal dollar to-day, and the
silver dollars that are now outstanding are a legal-tender for all
amounts, unless the legal-tender has been taken away by the Re-
vised Statutes. * * * The act of 1873 simply leaves the old
dollar where the law of 1853 left it. It says nothing about it."

Did Mr. Sherman know the real facts about thfi standard dollar
or did he not? If he did, what could have been his motive for these
widely different statements ? If he did not, what is to be said of this
exhibition on the part of the chairman of the Finance Committee?

Mr. Bright, of Tennessee, said of the law :

" It passed by fraud in the House, never having been printed in ad-
vance, being a substitute for the printed bill ; never having been read
at the clerk's desk, the reading having been dispensed with by an
impression that the bill made no material alteration in the coinage
laws; it was passed without discussion, debate being cut off by op-
eration of the previous question. It was passed, to my certain in-
formation, under such circumstances that the fraud escaped the
attention of some of the most watchful as well as the ablest statesmen
in Congress at the time. * * * * * * * ^y.^ gj^.^ ^^ ^g^g g^

fraud that smells to heaven. It was a fraud that will stink in the
nose of posterity, and for which some persons must give account
in the day of retribution." — {Record, vol. 7, part 1, second session.
Forty-fifth Congress, page 584.)

General Garfield, in a speech made at Springfield, Ohio, during
the fall of 1877, said :

'' Perhaps I ought to be ashamed to say so, but it is the trutb to
say that, 1 at that time being chairman of the Committee on Appro-
priations, and having my hands overfull during all that time with
work, I never read th^bill. I took it upon the faith of a prominent
Democrat and a prominent Republican, and I do not know that I
voted at all. There was no call of the yeas and nays, and nobody
opposed that bill that I know of. It was put through as dozens of
bills are, as my friend and I know, in Congress, on the faith of the
report of the chairman of the committee ; therefore I tell you, be-
cause it is the truth, that I have no knowledge about it."

Senator Allison, on February 15, 1878, when the bill (H. R. 1093)
to authorize the free coinage of the silver dollar was under con-
sideration, said :

*' But when the secret history of this bill of 1873 comes to be told,
it will disclose the fact that the House of Representatives intended
to coin both gold and silver, and intended to place both metals upon
the French relation instead of on our own, which was the true scien-
tific position with reference to this subject in 1873, but that the bill
afterward was doctored, if I may use the term, and I use it in no
offensive sense of course "

Mr. Sargent interrupted him and asked him what he meant by the
word " doctored."

Mr. Allison said:

" I said I used the word in no offensive sense. It was changed
after discussion, and the dollar of 420 grains was substituted for it." —
{Congressional Record, volume 7, part 2, Forty-fifth Congress, second
session, page 1058.)

. 37

On February 15, 1878, during the consideration of the bill above
referred to, the following colloquy between Senator Blaine and Sen-
ator Voorhees took place :

" Mr. Voorhees. I want to ask my friend from Maine, whom I
am glad to designate in that way, whether I may call him as one
more witness to tlie fact that it was not generally known whether
silver was demonetized. Did he know, as Speaker of the House,
presiding at that time, that the silver dollar was demonetized in the
bill to which he alludes ? "

" Mr. Blaine. I did not know anything that was in the bill at
all. As I have before said, little was known or cared on the subject.
[Laughter.] And now I should like to exchange questions with the
Senator from Indiana, who was then on the floor and whose business
it was, far more than mine, to know, because by the designation of
the House I was to put questions ; the Senator from Indiana, then
on the floor of the House, with his power as a debater, was to unfold
them to the House. Did he know?"

"Mr. Voorhees. I very frankly say that I did not.*' — (Ibid.,
page 1063.)

Senator Beck, in a speech made in the Senate January 10, 1878,
said :

'' It [the bill demonetizing silver] never was understood by either
House of Congress. I say that with full knowledge of the facts.
!No newspaper reporter — and they are the most vigilant men I ever
saw in obtaining information — discovered that it had been done." —
(Congressional liecord, volume 7, part 1, Forty-fifth Congress, second
session, page 260.)

Senator Hereford, in the Senate, on February 13, 1878, in discuss-
ing the demonetization of silver, said :

"So that I say that beyond the possibility of a doubt (and there is no
disputing it) that bill which demonetized silver, as it passed, never
was read, never was discussed, and that the chairman of the com-
jnittee who reported it, who offered the substitute, said to Mr. Hol-
man, when inquired of, that it did not affect the coinage in any way
whatever." — (Ibid., page 989.)

Senator Howe, in a speech delivered in the Senate on February 5,
1878, said :

"Mr. President, I do not regard the demonetization of silver as
an attempt to wrench from the people more than they agreed to pay.
That is not the crime of which I accuse the act of 1873. I charge
it with guilt compared with which the robbery of two hundred mill-
ions is venial." — (Congressional Becord, volume 7, part 1, Forty-fifth
Congress, second session, page 764.)

Mr. Thurman said :

"I can not say what took place in the House, but I know, when the
bill was pending in the Senate, we thought it was simply a bill to re-

38 •

form the mint, regulate coinage, and fix up one thing and another,
and there is not a single man in the Senate, I think, unless a mem-
ber of the committee from which the bill came, who had the slightest
idea that it was even a squint toward demonetization."

Senator Hoar, in 1874, then a member of the House, offered the fol-
lowing amendment to a bill then pending in that body, which indi-
cates that he was not at that time aware that silver was no longer
available as legal-tender money :

"That from and after the first day of September, 1874, nothing
but gold and silver coins of the United States shall be a legal-tender
in the payment of any debt thereafter contracted."

President Grant who signed the law was also evidently ignorant
of the fact that it demonetized silver, for eight months after the
passage of the bill he wrote a letter to Mr. Cowdrey, from which
the following extract is taken :

"The panic has brought greenbacks about to a par with silver.
1 wonder that silver is not already coming into the market to supply
the deficiency in the circulating medium. When it does come, and
I predict that it will soon, we will have made a rapid stride towards
specie payments. Currency will never go below silver after that.
The circulation of silver will have other beneficial effects. Experi-
ence has proved that its takes about forty millions of fractional cur-
rency to make small change necessary for the transaction of the busi-
ness of the country. Silver will gradually take the place of this
currency, and, further, will become the standard of values which
will be hoarded in a small way. I estimate that this will consume
from two to three hundred millions, in time, of this species of our
circulating medium. It will leave the paper currency free to per-
form the legitimate functions of trade and will tend to bring us back
where we must come at last, to a specie basis. I confess to a desire
to see a limited hoarding of money. It insures a firm foundation in
time of need. But I want to see the hoarding of something that has a
standard of value the world over. Silver has this, and if we once get
back to that our strides toward a higher appreciation of our currency
will be rapid. Our mines are now producing almost unlimited
amounts of silver, and it is becoming a question, ' What shall we do
with it?' I suggest here a solution that will answer for some years,
and suggest to you bankers whether you may not imitate it : To put it
in circulation now ; keep it there until it is fixed, and then we will
find other markets." — {31cPherson s Hand-Booh of Politics for 1874,
pages 134 and 135.)

On January 14, 1875, the same date that he signed the resump-
tion act. President Grant sent a special message to Congress advis-
ing the establishment of two or more mints at Chicago, St. Louis,
and Omaha to coin silver dollars to provide for resumption.

In this message General Grant said: "with the present facilities
for coinage it would take a period probably beyond that fixed by
Jaw for final specie resumption to coin the silver necessary to trans-
act the business of the country."

These quotations show conclusively that knowledge of the real
scop/C and eftect of the act was confined to very few, if indeed any
member of either House fully understood the measure, and mani-
festly not one at all comprehended its necessary economic effect.*

On its face the act related only to the Mint, and there was cer-
tainly nothing to indicate to the country that its real purpose was to
change the money standard. In this view of it, the act was clearly
a fraud upon the people, or, as Mr. Holman characterized it, "a
colossal swindle."

It has been claimed that the demonetization of silver was not fully
accomplished till the adoption of the Revised Statutes, June, 1874.
But a careful analysis of tlie act of 1873, as it finally passed Con-
gress, shows that silver was effectually demonetized by this act. It
is true, however, that until the adoption of the Revised Statutes,
standard silver dollars, if any existed, were an unlimited legal-tender,
but there were so few of these coins in existence that this fact was
of little practical value.

The only claimant to the authorship of the act of 1873 known is
Mr. John Jay Knox, formerly Deputy Comptroller and Comptroller
of the Currency. He claims to have inspired the report of the Secre-
tary of the Treasury in which he recommended the change in our
silver coins. Where Mr. Knox got his inspiration does not appear.
The following correspondence between Mr, Knox and the chairman
of the National Silver Committee may help to explain the true in-
i?vardness of this most memorable act :

*' The National Bank op the Republic,

" CoR. Wall Street and Broadway,

'' New York, April 8, 1890.
'*' Hon. A. J. Warner.

" Dear Sir: In a leaflet recently printed over your signature you
say: ' Wipe out the crime of 1873 by which the money sflfendard
was unjustly increased,' etc., etc.

'' As I v/as the author of the act of 1870, which subsequently be-

* Of so little importance was this act thoup:ht to be at the time that Mr. McPher-
80n, although giving the votes on National bank and currency laws, did not even
mention this act in his Hand-Book of 1874, and but briefly referred to it in 1876,
after the question came again under discus-ion, and not till this year, 1890, was
^t deemed of sufficient importance to hold a prominent place in the Hand-Book.

came the law of 18*73, or at least of that sectioM which discontinued
the coinage of silver dollars, 1 respectfully request that you will ia-
form me what you mean by the ' crime of 1873,' and oblige,

'' Yours truly,

" John Jay Knox."

" Marietta, 0., April 12, 1890.
" Hon. John Jay Knox, President National Bank of the Republic, Ne%(^

York City.

" Dear Sir: I beg to acknowledge the receipt of your letter of Aprit
8, in which you state that you were the author of the act of 1870,.
which subsequently became the law of 1873, or that part of it whick
demonetized silver, and ask what I mean by referring to that act afr
the 'crime of 1873.'

" An aggravated offense againstthepublicwelfare,or a great wrong
to society, is rightly,! think, classed as a public crime ; and certainly
an act that compasses public robbery can hardly be spoken of other-
wise than as a crime. Such acts may be the result of blunders, but
the acts themselves are rightly referred to as crimes. Blunders are
said sometimes to be worse than crimes, but without the intent they
do not, of course, come within the legal or technical definition of
cr}*ie.

'' The act of 1873 changed the money standard of the country from
gold and silver to gold alone. Every coin debt that existed at that
time was legally and equitably payable according to the bi-metallic
standard, and in coin of either metal. The act of 1873, changing the
standard to gold alone, changed it in the interest of creditor nations
and of credit holders and against debtors. The direct and necessary
effect of the act demonetizing silver was to increase the value of gold,
thus making the gold standard itself a very different standard from
the gold standard as it existed with silver possessing equal mintage
rights and legal- tender power with gold. This increase in the stand-
ard was made to apply to all debts, national, state, municipal and
private.

*• Now, I submit that the annals of mankind do not afford an ex-
ample of greater public wrong and injustice than the act demonetiz-
ing silver and thus changing the standard of value in favor of one
class and against another. The effect has been the spoliation of one^
third of the assessable value of all property for the benefit of the
credit-holding classes. Under this act the value of gold has appre-
ciated 50 per cent., and prices have fallen 33 per cent.

" Now, what is the justification of this change in the money stand-
ard ? When it took place we had not yet begun to pay our vast war
debt — a debt created mostly by a paper scale far below the level of
the metals. Under those circumstances to change the metallic scale^
as ordinary people now look upon it, was not merely a piece of in-
sane legislation, but a gigantic fraud, involving the most rank in-

justice. I have elsewhere publicly said that ' I did not believe it
was in the power of human ingenuity, ])rompted by the most malev-
olent greed, to devise a measure involving more widespread and far-
reaching injustice and wrong to mankind than the measure that de-
monetized silver.' I see no reason to take back or modify this state-
ment. If governments may, with impunity, alter money standards
where vast interests, rights, and equities are involved^ against either
creditor or debtor, then no rights are secure. In my judgment
such acts are rightly classed as high crimes. So much for the charac-
terization of the act of 1873.

"Now, as to its author. You put forth the claim that you are en-
titled to be

* * * < ^y merit raised
To that bad eminence.' * * *

* ' I have not been disposed to lay the blame for this act on any single
American citizen, nor do I now believe, notwithstanding the claim
you put forward to this questionable distinction, that any man ia
public life in the United States had any adequate comprehension of
the far-reaching and insidious consequences which have emanated
from this act. I am aware of the claim you put forth in your reply
to Mr. Delmar in 1885, and I have heretofore carefully searched the
Congressional records for all they contained on the question. I have
also heard many of our most eminent public men talk on the subject.
I heard what Judge Kelley, chairman of the Committee on Coinage^
in 1872, said in Congress as to the part he took, and called Mr.
Garfield, Mr. Blaine, and others as witnesses.

'' I doubt not you knew that the words demonetizing silver were in-
cluded in the sixty-seven sections of the coinage law, (which few of
those who voted for the bill seemed to understand) but I never be-
lieved that you comprehended the consequences of such a change
in our monetary system ; nor do you yet seem to fully comprehend
its enormity. Somebody, of course, did know; somebody did devise-
the act of 1873, and did foresee that it would work the spoliation it
was intended to. It was not an accident; accidents of that kind-
never happen. But he or they who devised the plan of silver de-
monetization for Germany and the United States understood the
philosophy of money. He or they were evidently men familiar with
the teachings of Ricardo, Mill and Overstone. But that any man.
in public life in the United States at that time understood the ques-
tion well enough to purposely devise such a scheme, I very much
doubt. The truth is that at that time there was very little knowl-
edge of monetary science in this country. Little was known even,
of the monetary literature that existed, and this fact was well knowrb
on the other side of the ocean. Silver was demonetized under the
delusion that gold constituted an invariable standard, 'the impos-
ture of an invariable gold yard-stick ' did the mischief. Mr. Sher-
man, in a public speech years afterwards, said that gold never changed)
in value — *'*It was fixed as the sun.' That yourself and Dr^

Xinderman were used as instruments to procure this nefarious legisla-
tion, I have never doubted. The absurd claims respecting the trade-
dollar (which was introduced to cover up the withdrawal of the stand-
ard legal-tender dollar)^ that if the dollar piece was made a little
larger we could get more per ounce for our silver in foreign coun-
tries illustrates what was going on at the time this legislation was
being concocted, and how little the money question was understood.

" What was there, pray, in the situation as far back as 1870 that
should have led a patriotic American to propose the demonetization
of silver ? Such a measure was certainly not called for by the peo-
ple, and not one in a million of the people in this country knew of
the act till long after its passage. Did you or did you not know at
the time that the demonetization of silver would increase the value
of gold the world over and add enormously to our debt burden ?
That is the question.

"I think the Hon. Thomas Fitch, at the St. Louis Silver Conven-
tion, correctly represented the situation when he said:

"'In this transaction England appeared as the bunco-steerer of
the world and Uncle Sara the gentleman from the rural districts.'

•'Therefore, in my judgment, the act of 1873 has never been too
severely denounced as an act involving the grossest injustice, and
therefore in the nature of a public crime. I have, however, never
charged any American citizen with deliberate intent to commit a
crime by devising or foisting this act upon the people, knowing
what its consequences would be, nor am I able to comprehend the
moral sense of one who comes forward to claim the authorship of
such a measure. Would you really have us understand that you
did deliberately and purposely devise this scheme to change the
standard of value and at the same time compel all debtors, the pub-
lic included, to pay debts created on a paper or coin basis, according
to the increased and constantly-increasing gold standard, and that,
too, when the national debt aggregated nearly $3,000,000,000 ? To
me such an act stands in the same category with piracy and other
forms of deliberate spoliation.

" Nor is the wrong done to debtors the onl}'' evil wrought by this
act. It has forced the constant adjustment of all industrial opera-
tions to an ever-appreciating standard of value, producing endless
l)ankruptcies, forcing idleness with attending strikes, and causing
more and greater wrongs and misery than any other cause s^nce the
war, if not more than the war itself.

" I do not believe that you knowingly devised any such thing, but
were simply made one of the instruments by which this wrong was
perpetrated. I am, therefore, I think more charitable to you than
jyou are to yourself.

"I am, very respectfullv vours,

''A. J. Warner."

CHAPTER IV.

The Bland-Allison Act of 1878.

The passage of the Resumption Act, June 14, 1875, awakened
new interest in the financial question throughout the country. The
act of 1873 had been vigorously assailed, and although as yet the
great mass of the people had not learned that silver had been de-
monetized, an active inquiry was aroused which led to discussions
in Congress, followed by various bills intended to remedy the wrong
done by that act.

On the 15th of August, 1876, a resolution was passed by Congress
providing for a commission to inquire —

First. Into the change which has taken place in the relative value
of gold and silver ; the causes thereof, whether permanent or other-
wise ; the efiects thereof upon trade, commerce, finance and the pro-
ductive interests of the country, and upon the standard of value in
this and foreign countries.

Second. Into the policy of the restoration of the double standard
in this country; and, if restored, what the legal relation between the
two coins, silver and gold, should be ;

Third. Into the policy of continuing legal-tender notes concur-
rently with the metallic standards, and the effects thereof upon the
labor, industries and wealth of the country ; and

Fourth. Into the best means for providing for facilitating the re-
sumption of specie payments.

The commission consisted of Messrs. John P. Jones, Lewis V.
Bogy and George S. Boutwell, of the Senate ; Messrs. Randall L.
Gibson, George Willard and Richard P. Bland, of the House ; Hon.
W. S. Groesbeck and Prof. Francis Bowen, as experts. George M.
Weston was appointed secretary.

The investigations of this commission were thorough and exhaus-
tive of the subject, and its report to Congress is one of the ablest
ever made on any subject. Every phase of the money question is dis-
cussed in a clear and lucid style, and the report is full of valuable
information on the subject. In fact, this report has become a sort
■of text-book on the question of money. Credit for the report is due
mainly to Senator Jones, of Nevada, and Mr. Weston, the Secretary.

44
Efforts to Kestore Silver.

On the 27th of March, 1876, Mr. Keagan moved an amendment Ut
a pending appropriation bill, providing that the " silver coins of tke
United States of the denomination of one dollar shall be legal-tender
at their nominal value for any payment not exceeding fifty dollars."
Silver coins smaller than one dollar were to be legal-tender for twenty
dollars.

On April 10, Mr. Sherman reported this bill from the Senate
Finance Committee, amended so as to coin a silver dollar of 412,8
grains, to contain devices readily distinguishable from the trade-
dollar, and to be a legal-tender for twenty dollars, but not to be
receivable for customs dues nor interest on the public debt.

Previous to this date, however, a desultory discussion had taken
place in the Senate over a bill to take away the legal-tender function
from the trade-dollar, from which quotations were made in the pre-
vious chapter. This discussion threw a flood of light on the situa-
tion, and brought out the dark portions of the act of 1873.

On the 20th of April, an amendment proposed by Mr. Sherman, to
coin a dollar of 412.8 grains,* to be a legal-tender for twenty dollars^
being still pending, Mr. Bogy moved to strike out the amendment,
and spoke in favor of the free coinage of both metals with unlimited
legal-tender.

Senator Jones, of Nevada, followed on the 24th and 25th of April,
with an able and exhaustive speech, replete with argument and
extensively quoting authorities in favor of the use of both metals as-
money.

From this discussion began a general movement in favor of the
remonetization of silver which has continued to grow from that day
to this, and will, no doubt, continue till silver is replaced by the side
of gold as a money metal with equal rights of mintage and legal-ten-
der with gold.

June 10th, 1876, Mr. Cox, of New York, reported in the House a
joint resolution providing for the distribution of the silver coin in the
Treasury. When this resolution went to the Senate it was amended
(June 21st) by adding section 2, as follows :

" That the trade-dollar shall not hereafter be a legal-tender, and
the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to limit, from time-

*The reason for making the proposed dollar 412.8 grains when the old dollar con
tained 412.5 grains is not given, but it was doubtless to make the ratio exactly 1
to 1 instead of 15.98+, as with the old dollar.

to time, the coinage thereof to such an amount as he may deem suffi-
cient to meet the export demand for the same."

This amendment passed the Senate, but was rejected in the House,
when Mr. Landers (June 28th) moved to further amend the bill, as
follows :

'^ And be it further provided, That the Secretary of the Treasury
is directed to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dollar of
the same weight and fineness in use January 1, 1861, and said dol-
lar shall be a legal-tender in payment of all debts, public and pri-
vate."

This amendment was agreed to in the House by yeas 110, nays 55.
The Senate disagreed to the Landers' amendment, and a conference
committee was appointed, and both the Landers and the trade-dollar
amendments were left out, and the bill was then passed July 13th.

Meantime, Mr. Cox, of New York, had reported another bill from
the Banking and Currency Committee containing the same pro-
vision as to the trade-dollar that was contained in the Senate bill,
which bill passed the House and went to the Senate, where it was
called up June 27th, and a substitute offered providing again for a
dollar of 412.8 grains to be a legal-tender for $20, and also taking
from the trade-dollar all legal-tender power.

Mr. Bogy, June 28, 1876, moved to strike out the provision limit-
ing the legal-tender of the proposed coin to $20, which was carried
by 18 to 14. This bill finally went back to the Committee on
Finance, and was not again reported to the Senate.

July 24, 1876, Mr. Kelley moved to suspend the rules and pass
the following bill in the House :

* ' A bill to provide for the coining of the standard silver dollar of
the United States, and for restoring its legal- tender character."

'* Whereas, By the omission to name the legal-tender silver dollar in
the enumeration of silver coins of the United States in the act of
February 12, 1873, the authority to coin said dollar was withheld ;
therefore,

" Be it enacted, etc., That there shall be, from time to time, struck
and coined at the several mints of the United States silver dollars of the
weight of 412^ grains, as provided for in the act of January 18, 1837,
upon which shall be the devices and legends provided by said act,
and that the said dollar shall be a legal-tender of payment for any
sums whatever."

The vote on this bill was — yeas 119, nays 66, not two-thirds, and
the bill did not pass. Mr. Kelley had become by this time fully

aware of his mistake in connection witja the act of 1873, which he
frankly acknowledged, and proceeded, as an honest legislator, to
do all in his power to right the wrong.

On the 25th of July, 1875, Mr. Bland introduced a bill similar to
Mr. Kelley's, which had failed to pass the House under suspension
of the rules requiring a two-thirds vote. Other bills of similar
purport were also introduced.

At the next session of Congress (December 12, 1876,) Mr. Bland
reported from the Committee on Mines and Mining the following as
a substitute for his bill (No. 3635) :

*'jBe it enacted, etc., That there shall be, from time to time, coined
at the mints of the United States silver dollars of the weight of 412^
grains standard silver to the dollar, as provided for in the act of
January 18, 1837, and that said dollar shall be a legal-tender for all
debts, public and private, except where payment of gold coin is
required by law."

On the following day, December 13, 1876, notwithstanding the
vigorous opposition of Mr. Garfield and others, the bill was passed
by a vote of 167 to 53. This bill, however, was not taken up at all
in the Senate.

November 5, 1877, Mr. Bland moved to suspend the rules and
pass the following bill :

''An act to authorize the free coinage of the standard silver dollar,
and to restore its legal-tender character."

"Be it enacted, etc., That there shall be coined at the several
mints of the United States silver dollars of the weight of 412^ grains
troy of standard silver, as provided in the act of January 18, 1837,
on which shall be the device and superscriptions provided by said
act ; which coins, together with all silver dollars heretofore coined
by the United States of like weight and fineness, shall be a legal-
tender, at their nominal value, for all debts and dues, public and
private, except where otherwise provided by contract ; and any
owner of silver bullion may deposit the same at any United States
coining-mint, or assay-office, to be coined into such dollars, for his
benefit, upon the same terms and conditions as gold bullion is de-
])08ited for coinage under existing laws.

'*^Sec. 3. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the pro-
visions of this act are hereby repealed."

The rules were suspended and the bill was passed by a vote of 164
to 34 ; the negative vote being almost entirely from New York and
New England.

The bill went to the Senate and was referred to the Finance Com-
mittee. November 21, 1877, Mr. Allison reported the bill from the

Committee on Finance to the Senate with an amendment striking:
out of the first section, the last clause, commencing "and any owner
of silver huUion," etc., and inserting the following, which changed
the act from free coinage to the purchase of bullion for coinage on
Government account :

"And the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed,
out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to
purchase, from time to time, silver bullion, at the market price
thereof, not less than two million dollars per month, nor more than
four million dollars per month, and cause the same to be coined
monthly, as fast as so purchased, into such dollars. And any gain
or seigniorage arising from this coinage shall be accounted for and
paid into the Treasury, as provided under existing laws relative to
the subsidiary coinage : Provided^ That the amount of money at any
one time invested in such silver bullion, exclusive of such resulting
coin, shall not exceed five million dollars."

Mr. Morrill ofiered an amendment limiting the proportion of sil-
ver that should be receivable for duties. This amendment was re-
jected by 46 to 21.

Mr. Wallace moved to amend so as to require one hundred mil-
lion such dollars to be coined in the next three years, which was re-
jected by a vote of 26 yeas to 41 nays.

The amendment of the committee, as reported by Mr. Allison, was-
then agreed to by 49 to 22. Mr. Windom, now Secretary of the
Treasury, voted for the amendment and for the bill.

Mr. Cameron, of Wisconsin, moved to make the dollar contain'
420 grains_, and Mr. Blaine to make it contain 425, and Mr. Eaton 440'
grains, all of which were rejected.

Mr. Christiancy moved to make the silver dollar redeemable in
gold, for which there were 14 votes.

The bill, with the Allison amendment, passed the Senate February
15, 1878, by a vote of 48 to 21. The following is the vote against the
bill : Nays — Messrs. Anthony, JBarnum, Bayard, Blaine, Burnside,
Christiancy, Conkling, Dawes, Edmunds, Hamlin, Hoar, Reman,
Lamar, McPherson, Mitchell, Morrill, Randolph, Rollins, Sargent,
Wadleigh, Whijte*— 21.

The bill came up in the House February 21, 1878, on a motion to
concur in the Senate amendments. Mr. A. S. Hewitt moved to lay
the bill and amendments on the table ; the vote on thi-s motion was
nays 205, yeas 71. On concurring in the Senate amendment to strike

* Names in italics are Democrats.

out of the House bill the provisions authorizing any owner of silver
to have it coined for his benefit — free coinage — and to substitute the
purchase of not less than $2,000,000 nor more than $4,000,000 worth
of bullion each month, the vote stood 203 yeas to 72 nays.

The amendment of the Senate providing for an international con-
ference was agreed to by 196 to 71. The other amendments were
concurred in without a division, andthe bill was passed and went to
the President.

February 28, President Hayes sent to the House a message veto-
ing the bill. One of the reasons given for his veto was that "the
right to pay duties in silver or in certificates for silver deposits
will, when they are issued in sufficient amount to circulate, put an
end to the receipt of revenue in gold, and thus compel the payment of
silver for both the principal and interest of the public debt."

Foreign opinion, imported through foreign banking houses in New
York, has dominated the money centers of this country, controlled
the metropolitan press, and dictated our financial policy ever since
the war. By this sentiment all our Presidents, by whichever party
-elected, seem to have been controlled ; and certainly in this respect
Mr. Hayes was no exception. Possessing little knowledge of mone-
tary questions himself he was the more easily controlled by what
seemed to him to be the more respectable opinion of banking circles.
But if he and other Presidents since had indulged more cautiously in
prophecy their reputations for financial foresight would have sufiered
less.

The bill was passed over the President's veto the same day the
message reached the House, by a vote of 196 to 73 in the House, and
by 46 to 19 in the Senate. — (See Congressional Record of February
29, for the vote in full.) The act as passed is as follows :

* ' An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dollar j
and to restore its legal-tender character :

"Be it enacted, That there shall be coined, at the several mints of
the United States, silver dollars of the weight of 412^ grains troy
of standard silver, as provided in the act of January 18, 1837, on
which shall be the devices and superscriptions provided by said
act ; which coins together with all silver dollars heretofore coined
by the United States, of like weight and fineness, shall be a legal-
tender, at their nominal value, for all debts and dues public and
private, except where otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract.
And the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pur-
chase, from time to time, silver bullion, at the market price thereof,
not less than two million dollars' worth per month, nor more thaa

four million dollars' worth, per month, and cause the same to be
coined monthly, as fast as so purchased, into such dollars ; and a
sum sufficient to carry out the foregoing provisions of this act is
hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not other-
wise appropriated. And any gain or seigniorage arising from this
coinage shall be accounted lor and paid into the Treasury, as pro-
vided under the existing laws relative to the subsidiary coinage :

" Provided, That the amount of money at any one time invested
in such silver bullion, exclusive of such resulting coin, shall not ex-
ceed five million dollars:

^^ And provided further, That nothing in this act shall be con-
strued to authorize the payment in silver of certificates of deposit
issued under the provisions of section two hundred and fifty-four of
the Revised Statutes.

''Sec. 2. That immediately after the passage of this act, the
President shall invite the governments of the countries composing
the Latin Union, so-called, and of such other European nations as
he may deem advisable, to join the United States in a conference to
adopt a common ratio between gold and silver, for the purpose of
establishing, internationally, the use of bi-metallic money, and secur-
ing fixity of relative value between those metals ; such conference to
be held at such place, in Europe or in the United States, at such
time within six months, as may be mutually agreed upon by the exec-
utives of the governments joining in the same, whenever the gov-
ernments so invited, or any three of them, shall have signified their
willingness to unite in the same.

*'The President shall, by and with the advice and consent of the
Senate, appoint three commissioners, who shall attend such confer-
ence on behalf of the United States, and shall report the doings
thereof to the President, who shall transmit the same to Congress.

"Said commissioners shall each receive the sum of two thousand
five hundred dollars and their reasonable expenses, to be approved
by the Secretary of State ; and the amount necessary to pay such
compensation and expenses is hereby appropriated out of any money
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.

"Sec. 3. That any holder of the coin authorized by this act may
deposit the same with the Treasurer or any assistant treasurer of
the United States, in sums not less than ten dollars, and receive
therefor certificates of not less than ten dollars each, corresponding
with the denominations of the United States notes. The coin de-
posited for or representing the certificates shall be retained in the
Treasury for the payment of the same on demand. Said certificates
shall be receivable for customs, taxes, and all public dues, and, when
80 received, may be reissued.

"Sec. 4. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the provis-
ions of this act are hereby repealed."

Instead of restoring silver to its place as a money metal, which it had
held from earliest times, and which had been given to it in the es-

tablishment of our Governraentj this act provided merely for making
money out of silver ; but it restored the le<:^al-tender power of tlie okl
dollar except where " expressly stipulated in the contract," This
exception can be regarded only as a mistake. The highest function
of money is to serve as a universal equivalent for everything else. It
is a medium in which all obligations are dischargeable. There is no
more reason why this exception should be made in the case of silver
money than of gold money, and it is time such attempts to fix an
exclusive gold standard upon this country was stopped.

The Constitution makes no difference between the two kinds of
money, and there should be none in the laws.

The silver ({ucstion will not be permanontl}'' settled till it is rightly
settled, and it will not be rightly settled till both metals are placed
u{)on a plane of absolute equality as to both legal-tender and right
of mintage.

During the pendency of the act of 1878 there was much discus-
sion relative to the payment of customs' dues, and the principal and
interest of the public debt in silver.

Mr. Hayes, in his veto message, seemed over-solicitous lest silver
might be used in the payment of the interest or principal of the bonds.

But on the 16th of January, 1878, Stanley Matthews, then Senator
from Ohio, afterwards associate Justice on the Supreme Bench, sub-
mitted the following concurrent resolution :

Tub Matthews' Resolution.

'' Whereas, By the act entitled, 'An act to strengthen the public
credit,' approved March 18, 1809, it was provided and declared that
the faith of the Uiiited States was thereby solemnly pledged to the pay-
ment in coin or its equivalent of all the interest-bearing obligations
of the United States, except in cases where the law authorizing the
issue of such obligations had expressly provided that the same might
be paid in lawful money or other currency than gold and silver ; and

" Whereas, All the bonds of the United States authorized to be
issued by the act entitled 'An act to authorize the refunding of the
national debt,' approved July 14, 1870, by the terms of said act
were declared to be redeemable in coin of the then present standard
value, bearing interest payable semi-annually in such coin ; and

" Whereas, All bonds of the United States authorized to be issued
under the act entitled 'An act to provide for the resumption of specie
payments,' ap[)roved January 14, 1875, are required to be of the
description of bonds of the United States described in the said act of
Congress ajjproved July 14, 1870, entitled '^An act to authorize the
refunding of the national debt;' and

"Wiii^KKAS, At the date of the i)assage of said act of Congress last
aforesaid, to wit, the fourteenth day of July, 1870, the coin of the

United States of standard value of that date included silver dollars
of the weight of 412^ grains each, declared by the act approved Jan-
uary 18, 1837, entitled 'An act supplementary to the act entitled an
act establishing a mint and reguhiting the coins of the United States,'
to be a legal-tender of payment, according to their nominal value
for any suras whatever : Therefore,

'^Be it resolved by the Senate {the House of Eepresentatives con-
cunnng therein), That all the bonds of the United States issued or
authorized to be issued, under the said acts of Congress hereinbefore
recited are payable, principal and interest, at the option of the Gov-
ernment of the United States, in silver dollars, of the coinage of the
United States, containing 412^ grains each of standard silver ; and
that to restore to its coinage such silver coins as a legal-tender in
payment of said bonds, principal and interest, is not in violation of
the public faith nor in derogation of the rights of the public creditor."

Mr. Morrill moved to refer the resolution to the Judiciary Com-
mittee, which was supported by the gold men, but was nut agreed to.

Mr. Conkling then moved to make it a joint resolution, which
would require the signature of the President. This was not agreed to.

Mr. Edmunds moved to strike out of the resolution the part that
made silver a legal-tender in tlie payment of the bonds and to provide
for their payment " in gold or its equivalent, and that any other
payment without the consent of the creditor would be in violation
of the public faith and in derogation of his rights." This was dis-
agreed to by 48 to 18. The 18 yeas being " Messrs. Anthony, Bar-
num, Bayard, Burnside, Christiancy, Conkling, Dawes, Eaton, Ed-
munds, Hamlin, Kernan, McPherson, Mitchell, Morrill, Randolph,
Rollins, Sargent, Wadleigh."— 18.

Other amendments were offered and rejected, when the resolution
passed by 43 to 22 .

Those voting against the resolution were: "Messrs. Anthony,
Barnum, Bayard, Blaine, Burnside, Christiancy, Conkling, Dawes,
Eaton,^d.vawn^B,'R.Q,m\m, Kernan, Lamar , McPherson,M\i(i\\e\\, Mor-
rill, Paddock, i?a%t/o?p^, Rollins, Sargent, Wadleigh, Windom." — 22.

Mr. Edmunds then moved to amend the preamble so as to change
the resolution into one declaring for gold payment of the bonds,
which was rejected, and the resolution went to the House, where, on
the 29th of January it passed, as it came from the Senate, by a vote
of 189 yeas to 79 nays.

Thus the Forty-fifth Congress, previous to the passage of the Bland-
Allison act, had declared that to pay the public debt in silver coin was
not in derogation of the rights of any creditor, and prepared the way
for the act already given, which followed on the 28th of February
of the same year.

CHAPTER V.

Period from 1878 to 1890.

The act of 1878 was nowhere accepted as a final settlement of
the silver question, and the next Congress took up the question
again as though no act had passed. In the extra session of the Forty-
aixth Congress, Mr. Warner, of Ohio, introduced a bill amending
section 3511 of the Revised Statutes so as to read as follows:

"The gold coins of the United States shall be a dollar or unit,"
etc.

Also amending section 3513 of the Revised Statutes so as to make
it read :

"The silver coins of the'United States shall be a dollar, or unit,"
etc., thus restoring the unit to both metals.

Also to amend section 3520 of the Revised Statutes so as to make
it read:

" Any owner of silver bullion may deposit the same at any mint,
to be formed into bars or into standard dollars of the weight of 412^
grains troy, for his benefit," etc., thus restoring unlimited coinage.

Also section 3585 so as to make it read:

"The gold coins of the United States and standard silver dollars
shall be a legal-tender in all payments," etc., thus restoring to silver
full legal-tender power the same as gold.

On the 30th of April, 1879, Mr. Warner, from the Committee on
Coinage, Weights and Measures, reported the bill to the House.
The bill was discussed at length, and its progress through the House
was stubbornly resisted, some twenty yea and nay votes being had
on various amendments and propositions. The bill finally passed
the House May 24, 1879, by 114 yeas to 97 nays. All of those voting
for the bill were Democrats or Greenbackers, except Belford, Cannon,
Daggett and J. J. Martin. Those voting against the bill were all
Republicans except Bliss, Covert, Deuster, Hurd, Morrison, Muller,
Paehler and Fernando Wood. This bill went to the Senate and
was referred to the Committee on Finance, of which Mr. Bayard was
chairman. It was reported against by the chairman and was never
acted upon by the Senate.

June 9, 1879, an act was passed raising the limit of legal-tender
for subsidiary silver coins to ten dollars, and also providing for their
redemption in full legal-tender money.

tTune 17th, 1879, while the free-coinage bill, which had passed the
House, was held in the Finance Committee of the Senate by its
chairman, Mr. Bayard, Mr. Vest offered the following resolution :

^^ Resolved by the Senate (the House of Repi^esentatives concurring),
That the complete remonetization of silver, its full restoration as a
money metal, and its free coinage by the mints of the United States
are demanded alike by the dictates of justice and wise statesman-
ship.

This resolution was also referred to the Committee on Finance by
a vote of 23 to 22, and was not again heard of.

In the Forty-ninth Congress a proviso was attached to the sundry
civil appropriation bill authorizing the issue of one, two and five
dollar silver certificates. This provision has operated to remove, in a
large measure, the objections to silver where large suras are required
in small denominations, as in pay-rolls on railroads and other like
operations.

Thus, in one way and another, have advances been made in silver
legislation, notwithstanding the persistent opposition of every ad-
ministration to silver.

In his last annual message, December, 1880, two years after the
passage of the act of 1878 over his veto, Mr. Hayes recommended
both the retirement of the greenbacks and the stoppage of the coin-
age of silvjer. He said :

"The longer the law remains in force, requiring as it does the
coinage of a nominal dollar, which, in reality, is not a dollar, the
greater becomes the danger that this country will be forced to accept
a single metal as the sole legal standard of value in circulation, and
this a standard of less value than it purports to be worth in the
recognized money of the world."

President Arthur repeatedly recommended the stoppage of the coin-
age of silver. In his last message, December, 1884, he recom-
mended the repeal of the act of 1878, and seems to agree with his
Secretary of the Treasury, "that unless this coinage and the issu-
ance of silver certificates be suspended, silver is likely at no distant
day to become our sole metallic standard." . ^

Mr. Cleveland emphasized his opposition to silver by a letter to"
members of the Forty-eighth Congress, before his inauguration, rec-
ommending the stoppage of the coinage of silver and predicting dire
consequences if it were not immediately done.

It having been reported that he intended to take this position in his
inaugural address, ninety-five Democrats of the House addressed to

•

him a communication, asking him not to commit the party to this po-
sition until all phases of the question could be fully considered.
Mr. Cleveland's reply was embraced in the following letter:

*' To the Eon. A. J. Warner and Others, Members of the Forty-eighth

Congress.

"Gentlemen: The letter which I have had the honor to receive
from you invites, and, indeed, obliges me to give expression to some
grave public necessities, although in advance of the moment when
they would become the objects of my official care and partial respon-
sibility. Your solicitude that my judgment shall have been carefully
and deliberately formed is entirely just, and I accept the suggestion
in the same friendly spirit in which it has been made. It is also
fully justified by the nature of the financial crisis which under the
operation of the act of Congress of February 28, 1878, is now close
at hand. By a compliance with the requirements of that law all the
vaults of the Federal Treasury have been and are heaped full of
silver coins which are now worth less than 85 per cent, of the gold
dollar prescribed as ' the unit of value ' in section 14 of the act of Feb-
ruary 12, 1873, and which, with the silver certificates representing
such coin, are receivable for all public dues. Being thus receivable,
while also constantly increasing in quantity at the lo.':^ of $28,000,000
a year, it has followed, of necessity, that the flow oi ^ 'd into the
Treasury has been steadily diminished. Silver and silver i>^ ;tificates
have displaced, and are now displacing gold, and the sum of gold in
the Federal Treasury now available for the payment of the gold obli-
gations of the United States, and for the redemption of the United
States notes called ' greenbacks,' if not already encroached upon, is
perilously near such encroachment. These are facts which, as they
do not admit of difference of opinion, call for no argument. They
have been forewarned to us in the official reports of every Secretary
of the Treasury from 1878 till now. They are plainly affirmed in
the last D.ecember report of the present Secretary of the Treasury to
the Speaker of the present House of Kepresentatives. They appear
in the official docnments of this Congress, and in the records of the
New York Clearing-House, of which the Treasury is a member, and
through which the bulk of the receipts and payments of the Federal
Government and of the country pass.

'' These being the facts of our present condition, our danger and our
duty to avert that danger would seem to be plain. I hope that you
concur with me and with the great majority of our fellow-citizens in
deeming it most desirable at the present juncture to maintain and
continue in use the mass of our gold coin as well as the mass of silver
already coined. This is possible by a present suspension of the pur-
chase and coinage of silver. I am not aware that by any other
method it is possible. It is of momentous importance to prevent the
two metals from parting company ; io prevent the increasing
displacement of gold by the increasing coinage of silver ; to pre-

vent the disuse of gold in the custom-houses of the United
States in the daily business of the people ; to prevent tlie ulti-
mate expulsion of gold by silver. Such a financial crisis as these
events would certainly precipitate, were it now to follow u[)on so
long a period of commercial depression, would involve the people of
every city and every State in the Union in a prolonged and disastrous
trouble. The revival of business enterpris#and prosperity so ardently
desired and apparently so near would be hopelessly postponed. Gold
would be withdrawn to its hoarding-places, and an unprecedented
contraction in the actual volume of our currency would speedily take
place. Saddest of all, in every workshop, mill, factory, store, and
on every railroad and farm, the wages of labor, already depressed,
would suffer still further depression by a scaling down of the purchas-
ing power of every so-called dollar paid into the hand of toil. From
these impending calamities it is surely a most patriotic and grateful
duty of the representatives of the people to deliver them. I am,
gentlemen, with sincere respect, your fellow-citizen,

''GROVER CLEVELAND."
^'Albany, February 24, 1885."

This letter having been published, the silver men in the House
thought a reply, to be made as public as the letter had been, was re-
quired, and especially after the vote taken in the meantime in the
House had disclosed the fact that a decided majority of the House
were opposed to stopping the coinage of silver.

The reply was given to the press, with the following preface, set-
ting forth the reasons for its publication :

" The friends of silvet in the House of Representatives, while at
first inclined to make a formal reply to the letter of President-elect
Cleveland, since it has been given to the public, decided to reply
openly to the parts of the letter with which they do not agree. They
say they did not invite a controversy, but, on the contrary, were
anxious to avoid it. They also say it was not until it had become,
known that a determined effort was being made to induce the Presi-
dent-elect to commit himself and his administration in advance to the
gold side of the currency question that they decided merely to ask
him not to commit himself until his Cabinet was formed, and both
sides of the question could be considered. They proposed at first to
send a delegation to present their views to him, but, after communi-
cating with him, at his suggestion they sent a paper signed by
nearly one hundred members of the present Congress and members-
«lect of the next Congress. No reply was necessary, they assert, and
none was expected. They further say that, while regretting the step
the President-elect has taken in advance of his inauguration and of
the formation of his Cabinet, they do not propose to have a contro-
versy unless it is forced upon them. They believe, however, in the

independence of the legislative brancli of the Government, and will
at all times maintain it. They furnish the following as a statement
of their views :

THE REPLY OF THE SILVER MEN.

"Washington, 3Iarc7il, 1885.
"In the letter no distinction is made between silver coin and silver
bullion. While it is true that silver bullion, which is excluded from
coinage, and consequently from monetary use, is worth less (in the ratia
of 16 to 1) 'than 85 percent, of the gold dollar,' 'silver coins which are
admitted to monetary use the same as gold, are equal in value to gold
coin.' The silver dollar will exchange for as much as a gold dollar. It
will even buy the gold with which a gold dollar may be made. France^
with a population of 36.000,000, and a territory not as large as
Texas, has in circulation §600,000,000 of silver, with $850,000,000
in gold, while we have but $200,000,000 of full tender silver, to over
$600,000,000 of gold. Altogether, $1,300,000,000 of silver coins
at the rate of 15^ to 1 are held in circulation in Europe, side by side
with $2,600,000,000 of gold. Of paper and silver together, includ-
ing silver certificates, we have less than $750,000,000, which shows^
that in this country there is more gold than paper, and nearly three
times as much gold as silver. With this proportion in our currency,
and with gold and silver equally full tender for everything, it is dif-
ficult to understand why the Secretary of the Treasury might not, if
he chose to do so, pay out more silver and less gold. Of course, if
while receiving into the Treasury, United States notes, silver and
silver certificates, gold or gold certificates, he pays out only gold, hi&
stock of gold would diminish. If, on the other hand, he should pay
out more silver and paper and less gold, the character of the reserve
in the Treasury would change. In other words, this is a matter en-
tirely under the control of the Secretary of the Treasury. There
would be no need of legal-tender if the one who receives money be
permitted always to choose the kind he will haVe."

How Silver Displaces Gold.

" That silver and silver certificates take the place of or displace
gold, is true, but only as Treasury or bank notes displace it. The
withdrawal of a hundred millions of bank notes, or the issuance of
a hundred millions, has the same effect on gold as so much in silver
or silver certificates. Why has it never been proposed to withdraw
national bank notes as a means of preventing the expulsion of gold ?"'

Gold Obligations.

"To the proposition that there now exists or ever have existed
under our Constitution obligations specifically payable in gold, the sil-
ver men feel it their solemn duty to enter their most emphatic dissent
at the very outset of the discussion of the currency question. No such

obligations exist or ever diJ exist. Webster said : 'Gold and silver,
at rates fixed by Congress, constitute the legal standard of value in
this country, and neither Congress nor any State has authority to
establish any other standard, or to displace this.'

"The 'act to strengthen the public credit,' approved March 18,
1869, solemnly pledges the United States to the payment of the bonds
in coin. The Refunding Act of July 14, 1870, provided for the pay-
ment of all refunding bonds in coin of the then present standard value,
which is the same as the present value. The Resumption Act of
January 14, 1875, provided that from and after the first day of Janu-
ary, 1879, the Secretary of the Treasury should redeem in coin, the
outstanding legal-tender notes.

"The act of February 28, 1878, providing for the resumption of
the cdKnage of the standard dollar, made silver dollars legal-tender
for all debts and dues, public and private, unless otherwise expressly
stipulated in the contract ; and there is not a public obligation out-
standing, and never was, containing a stipulation for payment in
gold.

" In January, 1878, Congress adopted the following concurrent
resolution offered by Stanley Matthews, then Senator, now on the
Supreme bench :

' Besolved, That all the bonds of the United States issued, or au-
thorized to be issued, under the said acts of Congress hereinbefore
recited, are payable, principal and interest, at the option of the Gov-
ernment of the United States, in silver dollars of the coinage of the
United States, containing 412^ grains each of standard silver ; and
that to restore to its coinage such silver coins as a legal-tender in
payment of said bonds, principal and interest, is not in violation of
the public faith, nor in derogation of the rights of the public credi-
tor.' Over $900,000,000 of the bonds now outstanding were issued
since the passage of this resolution and the act of 1878."

The Opinions of Secretaries. «

"The opinions of Secretaries of the Treasury from 1878 down, are
referred to as authority. The opinions of Secretaries are valuable
when supported by facts and sound reasons, but ought not to control
unless they are. It cannot be forgotten, however, that these same
Secretaries have steadily predicted what has not taken place."

Coin of the Two Metals.

" The friends of silver concur in the opinion that it is most desirable
'to maintain and continue in use the mass of our gold coin, as well
as the mass of silver already coined.' They agree, too, that it is of
'momentous importance to prevent the coin of the two metals from
parting company.' But the two metals, as metals, have already
parted company under the influence of silver demonetization in other
countries, and the hostility of the Treasury and the banks to silver
in this. But that the continued coinage of silver at the rate of §28,-

000,000 a 3^ear will drive gold out of circulation in the near future,
or force it to a premium, does not to them seem to be sustained by
facts or sound reasoning. The total volume of currency in the United
States, outside of gold, is less than $750,000,000. It is believed to
be a principle of economic science, perfectl}'- well settled, that if a
volume of $750,000,000 is not sufficient in itself to maintain prices
in this country at the level of international prices, then gold will
come here and stay here in sufficient amount to make, with the vol-
ume already in circulation, what will constitute our distributive share
of the world's money as determined by our international trade.
That $750,000,000 is not a sufficient volume to maintain prices at the
world's level of prices is evidenced by the fact that $600,000,000 gold,
a considerable part of which at least is in circulation, either in the
form of coin or certificates, now stays here, and it will go awaf only
when prices become lower elsewhere than they are here.

"It is believed, therefore, that no such crisis as has been foreboded
can overtake us under existing conditions. It is not believed to be in
the power of all the banks in the country, even if they were so dis-
posed, to take gold out of circulation and hold it for any length of
time at a premium. They must first lock up the world's money and
arrest the world's commerce. Nor can the paper, or silver, or silver
certificates now in circulation side by side with gold, expel the gold.
The gold can be expelled only by forcing into circulation, in addition
to the $750,000,000, either silver or paper equal to the entire volume
of gold now in circulation. In that manner, under Gresham's law,
gold might be expelled, and probably would be. It is doubtless true,
too, that, if population and wealth in this country were at a stand,
then the continued coinage of silver in sufficient volume would, in
time expel gold from circulation ; but as long as population and
wealth go on increasing, then the conditions of the problem are
changed. In fact, in order to preserve a stable ratio between money
volume and population and wealth, an annual increase of not less
than $40,000,000 of currency of some kind is now required."

Additional Coin Needed.

"In other words, the increase of population and wealth calls for
an addition to our circulation of at least $40,000,000 a year. If, while
these conditions continue, silver is coined at the rate of only $28,000,-
000 a year, there is left still a considerable void to be filled with gold.
This is the reason why gold has increased in the country steadily
since the act of 1878 was passed, and why gold has increased by nearly
$14,000,000 during the last year, and is now increasing at the rate
of nearly $1,000,000 a month, notwithstanding the depression of
business in the country. As a matter of fact there is to-day more
gold in the country than there ever was before. Another fact is that
880,000,000 of the gold in the Treasury was put there in exchange
for silver certificates."

Effect of Stopping the Coinage of Silver.

''The immediate effect of stopping the coinage of silver must neces-
sarily be to lower the price of silver bullion and gradually to appre-
ciate the value of gold the world over. The difficulties in the way
of establishing an international ratio so much desired, or of a read-
justment of relative value to gold here, would thereby be increased."

Things Impossible.

"How it is possible for such things to take place as are predicted in
the last paragraph of the letter, it is difficult to see. Gold is to be
withdrawn to 'its hoarding-places,' followed by an 'unprecedented
contraction in the actual volume of our currency.' Such a con-
traction, it has been shown, must be followed by a great fall of prices.
What then? Would not gold flow here, as the tides flow? Surely,
it would come as fast as ships could bring it. What would those
who have been hoarding gold do with it then? 'Labor,' the letter
says, 'already greatly depressed, would suffer still further depres-
sion by the scaling down of the purchasing power of every so-called
dollar paid into the hand of toil.' Here, in one sentence, we have
'gold hoarded,' 'unprecedented contraction,' 'fall of prices,' and
the 'scaling down of the purchasing power of the dollar.' That
is, when these 'impending calamities' come, prices are to fall, every-
thing become cheaper, and money become less valuable at the same
time! That is, both sides of the balance go down together! Usually
one side goes up as the other goes down. Usually, whf^n commodi-
ties become cheaper, money becomes relatively dearer, and vice versa.
Usually a contraction of the money volume results in a rise in the
value of money, and not in a fall. The contradictions involved in
this paragraph of the letter are hardly calculated to carry conviction
to those who have ever studied money questions at all, or to awaken
in them any sense of alarm at approaching calamities from such
causes."

Need of a Business Revival.

"In one thing all will agree, and that is in the importance to the
whole country, and especially to the laboring classes now struggling
with want, of a revival of business and a return of prosperity. The
one condition essential to this is to stop the contraction of the cur-
rency. No country ever did thrive and no country ever can thrive
while its money is undergoing contraction. Business cannot be se-
cure when its foundation is constantly giving way. Stability in the
volume of money is the one essential requisite to safe and prosperous
business.

" But what is the monetary condition of the world to-day ? Are we
not brought face to face with the startling fact that the gold pro-
duction of the world has fallen below its consumption in the arts,

and that there is no probability of any new gold for money supply
for the centuries to come? With this condition of things as to
gold, shut off silver, as is now proposed, and where is the money
supply, even for keeping up the stock of coin now in the hands of
the world, to come from? "

Gloomy Prospects Ahead.

"As aggravating this state of affairs in this country, the paper cur-
rency is undergoing contraction by the surrender of bank-notes. If
this state of things is to last, upon what is there to build hope of re-
turning prosperity? In the last three years, according to the Lon-
don Economist, prices have fallen more than 20 percent.; that is,
money has appreciated in that ratio. In 'the quarter of a century
following the gold discoveries of California and Australia, the stock
of the precious metals in use as money was increased by nearly 40
per cent. The trade and commerce of Great Britain and the United
States during the same period increased more that fourfold, and
wealth proportionally. Reverse these conditions, shut off all money
supply, and what room for hope is there for mankind except for
those whose incomes are sure? With the appreciation of money all
debts appreciate. When it is remembered that such debts run into the
tens of billions — more than the entire present wealth of the United
States — the vast consequences of the appreciation of money are seen.
The control of feudal lords over the earth in the middle ages was in-
significant compared with the control of modern creditor kings and
lords who, through legislation, can secure an increase in the value
of money. It can be shown that it will take more labor, or more of
the produce of labor, to pay what remains of our own national debt
now that it would have taken to pay it all at the close of the war.
Eighteen million bales of cotton were the equivalent in value of the
entire interest-bearing debt in 1865, but it will take 35,000,000 bales
at the price of cotton now, to pay the remainder of the debt. Twenty-
five million tons of bar iron would have paid the whole debt in 1865 ;
it will now take 35,000,000 tons to pay what remains after all that
has been paid as principal and interest.

"In view of the vast interests involved, the friends of silver did not
think it too much to ask that the question of stopping the coinage
of silver should not be separated from its relation to the whole cur-
rency question and acted upon by itself. The currency question,
it is believed, at the present time overshadows all other questions,
and all the friends of silver have asked is that the President-elect
should give it full consideration and hear both sides before commit-
ting his administration to any particular view respecting it.*

*An attempt was made to carry out Mr. Cleveland's recommendation to stop the
coii^age of silver by attaching a provision to that effect to the sundry civil bill,
then pending in the House, but this was voted down February 26, 1885.

In Bubmitung the question to a vote —

The Speaker said: "The Chair has already stated that if this resolution be

On the 8th of April, 1886, in the Forty-ninth Congress, a bill pro-
Tiding for free coinage, which had been reported adversely by the
Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, came before tlie
House, when Mr. Dibble, of South Carolina, offered as a substitute
for the bill one providing that unless prior to July 1, 1889, silver was
remonetized " through the concurrent action of the nations of Europe
with the United States " coinage under the act of 1878 should be
discontinued. This was rejected by yeas 84, nays 201.

Meantime Mr. Cleveland repeated in several messages his recom-
mendations to stop the coinage of silver. The attitude, moreover,
of his Secretaries, and especially of his Treasurer, Mr. Jordan,
towards silver, as well as his selection of men to represent to other
countries the position of the United States on the silver question,
marked his administration as throughout peculiarly hostile to silver.

In the light of experience no doubt all the Presidents who, follow-
ing the advice of Wall street, have made predictions that could not
and have not come true, would withdraw them if they could.

The prediction of all the Presidents and Secretaries from the pass-
age of the act of 1878 down, have been that the continued coinage of
silver at the rate of $2,000,000 a month even, would drive out gold
and leave us with only silver. In these predictions the laws govern-
ing the distribution of' metallic money were entirely ignored.

Unless silver was coined in excess of the amount required to furnish
us our full distributive shareofthe world'smoneyjit could notdriveout
gold. In other words, unless our silver coinage was annually greater
than required to maintain an even ratio between money volume and
population and wealth, no gold would be expelled by it ; but, on
the contrary, if the coinage of silver was not sufficient to meet this
increased need for money, gold would come here to fill the void.

passed, which requires a vote of two-thirds, then the bill, whatever may be ia-
eluded in it, can be passed by a majority of the House."

The question was taken ; and it was decided in the negative— yeas 118, nays 152,
not voting 54.

The following Republicans voted against stopping the coinage of silver :
Anderson, Atkinson, Belford, Breitung, Cannon, Funston, Goflf, Hanback, Hart,
Henderson, T. J., Hepburn, Holmes, Houk, Keifer, Kellogg, McCoid, Millikeu,
Nelson, Payson, Perkins, Peters, Petti none. Price, Rowell, Ryan, Stephenson,
Thomas, Weaver, White, J. D., Wilson, Jas., Wood.

The following Democrats voted to strp the coinage: Adams, J. J., Arnot, Bagley,
Barbour, Beach, Belmont, Bowen, Buckner, Collins, Connolly, Converse, Cox, S,
S., Dargan, Deuster, Eaton, Elliot, Ellis, Ermentrout, Ferrell, Fiedler, Findley,
Follett, Garrison, Greenleaf, Hancock, Hardy, Hewett, A. S., Hoblitzell, Hopkins,
Hunt, Hutchens, Jones, B. W., Mitchell, Morse, Moulton, Muller, Mutchler, Post,
Potter, Pusey, Randall, Rogers, W. H., Seymour, Snyder, Sprigs, Stevens, Storm,
Swope, Talbott, Tucker, Van Alstyne, Winans, Jno., Woodward.

And that is just what has taken place. The coinage of $2,000,000 a
month has not heen enough to take the place of bank notes canceled
and supply the demand of a growing population, and consequently
gold has come here, resulting in a relative contraction of the world's
supply of money to the hurt of every country, by lowering prices
everywhere.

From 1878 to 1890 the increase of gold in this country, as the re-
sult of the law above given, has been $592,000,000.*

Will the present law requiring the purchase of 4,500,000 ounces,
and the issue of notes therefor, supply the requirements of the grow-
ing population and business of this country, and also take the place
of national bank notes ? This is the problem.

Those who have studied this question most thoroughly have come
to the conclusion that free coinage will no more than supply this
want now, and that the question likely to arise in the near future is not
whether there will be too much gold and silver for money, but what
must be done to prevent the disastrous consequences of an insufficient
supply of metallic money, which must always result in falling prices
and hard times, unless provided against in some way.

International Conferences.

The second section of the act of 1878 provided for an international
conference to consider the adoption of a common ratio between gold
and silver for all commercial nations.

The commissioners on the part of the United States were Mr. Fen-
ton, Mr. Grroesbeck and Mr. Walker. Mr. S. Dana Horton was ap-
pointed secretary. Austria, Belgium, France, Italy, The Nether-
lands, Russia, Sweden and Norway were represented.

The ^commission held several sessions at Paris between August
10 and October 17, when the American delegates submitted their
report. In this report they say : "As it was, early in the course of
the proceedings, shown to be impossible, under the complications ex-
isting, to'secure an agreement for giving circulation to silver as
money of full power, your commissioners assented to the views of
leading members * * * that it was useless to discuss the
particular ratio — whether 1 to 15^ or 1 to 16, or some other."

The report of this conference, published by authority of Congress,
contains a good deal of information, but no practical results were
reached.

* See report of Director of the Mint for 1889.

The Monetary Conference of 1881.

A second international conference met at Paris April 19, 1881.
The representatives from the United States were Mr. Evarts, Mr.
Thurman, and Mr. Howe. S. Dana Horton was appointed secretary
to this legation also. The following states were represented :

Austria-Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Greece, The
Netherlands, Portugal, Sweden, Norway, Spain, Switzerland, France
and the United States.

Thirteen sessions were held, but, as with the previous conference,
no practical results were arrived at.

Early in the conference the United States delegates submitted the
following propositions :

" It is the opinion of this assembly that it is not to be desired that
silver should be excluded from free coinage in Europe and the United
States of America. On the contrary, the assembly believe that it is
desirable that the unrestricted coinage of silver, and its use as money
of unlimited legal tender, should be retained where they exist, and,
as far as practicable, restored where they have ceased to exist."

II.

" The use of both gold and silver as unlimited legal-tender money
may be safely adopted ; first, by equalizing them at a relation to be
fixed by international agreement; and, secondly, by granting to each
metal, at the relation fixed, equal terms of coinage, making no dis-
crimination between them."

The answer to which was made in the following terms :

^' The delegates of the European states, represented in the confer-
ence, desire to express their sincere thanks to the Government of the
United States for having procured an international interchange of
opinion upon a subject of so much importance as the monetary ques-
tion.

" Having maturely considered the proposals of the representatives
of the United States, they recognize :

" 1. That it is necessary to maintain in the world the monetary
functions of silver, as well as those of gold, but that the selections
for use of one or the other of the two metals, or of both simultane-
ously, should be governed by the special position of each State, or
group of States.

''2. That the question of the restriction of the coinage of silver
should equally be left to the discretion of each state, or group of
states, according to the particular circumstances in which they may
find themselves placed, and the more so in that the disturbance pro-
duced during the recent years in the silver market has variously af-
fected the monetary situation of the several countries.

'' 3. That the differences of opinion which have appeared, and the
fact that even some of the states which have the double standard,
find it impossible to enter into a mutual engagement with regard to
the free coinage of silver, exclude the discussion of the adoption of a
common ratio between the two metals."

The report of the American delegates to this conference made a
large volume, containing, like the report of the preceding confer-
ence, much valuable matter, which was printed first in 1881 and re-
printed in 1887, but, as with the previous conference, no practical
results followed.

CHAPTER VI.

Silver in the Fifty-First Congress.

In his annual report for 188^, the Secretary of the Treasury, while
Tecommending a larger use of silver, proposed a plan which, in un-
friendly hands, it was feared, might result in the complete demone-
tization of silver. His proposition was to repeal the act of 1878, re-
quiring the purchase of not less than two million dollars' worth of
silver each m£)nth, and to substitute in its place a law authorizing the
purchase of silver bullion at its market value, and the issue of notes
therefor, with the right to redeem the notes in bullion at its market
price at the time of redemption ; thus making of silver bullion a
commodity to be sold off when necessary to redeem notes issued for
it^ instead of making the silver itself money needing no redemption.

The following is the proposition of the Secretary as given in his
annual report:

Issue Treasury notes against deposits of silver bullion at the market price of
silver when deposited, payable on demand in such quantities of silver bullion as
will equal in value, at the date of presentation, the number of dollars expressed
on the face of the notes at the market price of silver, or in gold, at the option of
the Government ; or in silver dollars at the option of the holder. Repeal the com-
pulsory feature of the present coinage act.

In this proposition there is no restriction on the amount of silver
that may be deposited, but in the bill formulated in the Treasury
Department and introduced in the House, the deposit of silver was
limited to the product of the mines of the United States.

This bill was introduced in the House by Mr. Conger, January 20th,
1890, and numbered 5381. The following is the bill as first intro-
duced in the House:

A BILL (H. R. 5381) authorizing the issue of Treasury notes on deposits of
silver bullion.

Be it enoctfd by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of Amer-
ica in Congress assembled, That any owner of silver bullion, the product of the mines
of the United Slates or of ores smelted or refined in the United States, may (deposit
the same at any coinag« mint or at any apsay office in the United States that the
Secretary of the Treasury may des'gnate, and re tive therefor Treasury notes here-
inafter provided for, equal at the date of deposit to the net value of such silver, at
the market price, such price to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury
Tinder rules and regulations prescribed, based upon the price current in the lead-
ing silver markets of the world ; but no deposit consisting in whole or in part of
silver bullion or foreign silver coins imported into this country, or bars resulting
from melted or refined foreign silver coins, shall be received under the provisions
of this act.

Sec. 2. That the Secretary of the Treasury shall cause to be prepared Treasury
notes in such amounts as may be required for the purpose of the above section,
and in such form and denominations as he may prescribe : Frovidtd, That no note
shall be of a denomination less than one dollar nor more than one thousand dol-
lars.

Skc 3. That the notes issued under this act shall be receivable for customs, tasreS;,
and all public dues, and when received into the Treasury may be reissued, and
Buch notee, when held by any national banking association, shall be counted as
part of its lawful reserve.

Sec. 4. That the notes issued under the provisions of this act shall be redeemed
upon demand at the Treasury of the United States or at the oflBce of an Assistant
Treasurer of the United States, by the issue of a certificate of deposit for the sum
of the notes so presented, payable at one of the mints of the United States, in an
amount of silver bullion equal in value, on the date of said certificate, to the num-
ber of dollars stated therein, at the market price of silver, to be determined as pro-
vided in section one; or such notes may be redeemed in gold coin, at the option
of the Government : Provided, That upon demand of the holder, such notes shall
be redeemed in silver dollars.

Sec. 5. That when the market price of silver, as determined by the Secretary of
the Treasury, shall exceed one dollar for three hundred and .seventy-one and
twenty-five hundredths grains of pure silver, it shall be the duty of the Secretary
of the Treasury to refuse to receive deposits of silver bullion for the purposes o£
this act.

Sec. 6. That it shall be lawful for the Sacretary of the Treasury, with the ap-
proval of the President of the United States, to suspend, temporarily, the receipt
of silver bullion for Treasury notes at any time when he is satisfied that through
combinations or speculative manipulation of the market the price of silver is arbi-
trary, nominal, or fictitious.

Skc. 7. That the silver bullion deposited under this act, represented by Treasury
notes which have been redeemed in gold coin or in silver dollars, may be coined
into standaid silver dollars or any other denomination of silver coin now author-
ized by law, for the purpose of replacing the coin used in the redemption of the
notes.

Sec. 8. That so much of the act of February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred
and seventy-eight, entitled "An act to authorize the coinage of the standard sil-
ver dollar and to restore its legal-tender character," aa requires the monthly pur-
chase and coinage into silver dollars of not less than two million dollars nor more^
than four million dollars' worth of silver bullion, is hereby repealed.

Sec. 9. That any gain or seigniorage arising from the coinage which maybe exe-
cuted under the provisions of this act, shall be accounted for and paid into the
Treasury as provided by existing law.

Sec. 10. That silver bullion received under the provisions of this act shall be
subject to the requirements of existing law, and the regulations of the mint ser-
vice, governing the methods of receipt, determining the amount of pure silver
contained, and the amount of charges or deductions, if any, to be made.

Sec. 11. That nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent the purchase, from
time to time, as may be required, of silver bullion for the subsidiary silver coinage. .

Sec. 12. That a sum sufficient to carry out the provisions of this act is hereby
appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.

Sec. 13. That all acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the provisions of this
act are hereby repealed.

Sec. 14. That this act shall take efiect thirty days from and after its passage.

A bill, in substance, the same, was introduced in the Senate. Vari-
ous other bills, including a number for free coinage, were also intro-
duced in the House and Senate, Among these were the following,
by Mr. Culberson, of Texas, and by Mr. Townsend, of Colorado, which,
though brief, cover the question :

By Mr. Culberson, of Texas. Bill to repeal the restriction upon

the coinage of the silver dollar :

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of Amer-
ica in Congress assembled, That all laws or parts of laws which limit the coinage
of the silver dollar be, and the same are hereby, repealed.

This should have included legal tender as well as coinage.

By Mr. Townsend, of Colorado. To provide for the free and un-
limited coinage of the silver dollar.

Be it enaded^y the Senate and Hottse of Eepresentatives of the United States of AmeV'
ica in Congress asseiiihled, That it shall be lawful for any person or persons to
deposit at any mint of the United States silver bullion of standard fineness, in quan-
tities of not less than one hundred ouiicts, and to have the same coined into dol-
lars of four hundred and twelve and one-half grains troy, on the same terms and
subject to like conditions that gold is received and coined at said mints ; and eaid
dollars shall be legal-tender, at their nominal value, for all debts and dues, public
and private.

Among the arguments advanced by the Secretary in favor of the

plan proposed by him, was the following :

By this method it is believed that the way would be paved for the opening of
the mints of the world to the free coinage of silver and the restoration of the
former equilibrium of the money metals.

The Committee on Coinage. Weights and Measures entered upon
the consideration of the Conger Bill, containing the Treasury proposi-
tion, January 27, 1890. The committee consisted of —

Edwin H. Conger, of Iowa, S. G. Comstock, cf Minn., Charles Tracy, of N. Y.,
Charles P. Wickham, of O., Horace F. Bartine, of Nev., Wm. Mutchler, of Penn.,
Joseph H. Walker, of Mass., Charles J. Kuapp, of N. Y., W. F. Wilcox, of Conn.,
Thos. H. Carter, of Mon., Abner Taylor, of 111., Antonio Joseph, of N. M.

Jas. R. Williams, of 111., Richard P. Bland, of Mo.,

Various persons appeared before this Committee to give testimony
or submit arguments on the subject; araougthera were Senator Teller,
A. J. Warner, Chairman of the National Silver Committee ; E. D.
Stark, Hon. G. G. Symes, Mr. Joseph Sheldon, and others ; Secre-
tary Windom also appeared and explained his plan at length to the
Committee. March 26th, 1890, Mr. Conger reported the bill back
to the House amended to read as follows :

H. R. 5381, Fifty-first Congress, first session.

A BILL authorizing the issue of Treasury notes on deposits of silver bullion.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United. States of America
in Congress Assembled, That any owner of silver bullion, the product of the mines
of the United States or of ores smelted or refined in the United States, may deposit
the same at any coinage mint or at any assay office in the United States that the
Secretary of the Treasury may designate, and receive therefor Treasury notes here-
inafter provided for, equal at the date of deposit to the net value of such silver, at
the market price ; such price to be determined by the Secretary of the Treasury
under rules and regulations prescribed, based upon the price current in the leading
silver markets of the world, but no deposit consisting in whole or in part of silver
bullion or foreign silver coins imported into this country, or bars resulting from
melted or refined foreign silver coins, shall be received under the provisions of
this act.

Sec. 2. That the Secretary of the Treasury shall cause to be prepared Treasury
notes in such amounts as may be required for thf^ purpose of the above section,
and in such form and denominations as he may prescribe: Provided, That no
note shall be of a denomination less than one dollar nor more than one thousand
dollars.

Sec. 3. That the notes issued under this act shall be receivable for customs, taxes,
and all public dues, and when received into the Treasury may be reissued, and
such notes, when held by any national banking association, shall be counted as
part of its lawful reserve.

Sec. 4. That the notes issued under the provisions of this act shall be redeemed
upon demand at the Treasury of the United States or at the office of an assistant
treasury of th* United States, by the issue of a certificate of deposit for the sum
of the notes so presented, payable at one of the mints of the United States, in an
amount of silver bullion equal in value on the date of said certificate to the num-
ber of dollars stated therein, at the market price of silver, to be determined as
provided in section one ; or such notes may be redeemed in gold coin, at the
option of the Government : Promdid, That upon demand of the holder such notes
shaU be redeemed in silver dollars.

Sec 5. That when the market price of silver, as determined by the Secretary of
the Treasury, shall exceed one dollar for three hundred and seventy-one and
twenty five hundredths grains of pure silver, it shall be the duty of the Secretary
of the Treasury to refuse to receive deposits of silver bullion for the purposes of
this act: Provided, That when the market price of silver, as determined in accord-
ance with section one of this act, is one dollar for three hundred and seventy-one
and twenty-five hundredths grains of pure silver, it shall be lawful for the owner
of any silver bullion, the deposit o.f which for notes is herein provided for, to de-
posit the same at any coinage mint of t*e United States, to be formed into standard
Bilver dollars for his benefit, as provided in the act of January eighteenth, eighteen
hundred and thirty-seven.

Skc. 6 That the silver bullion deposited under this act, represented by Treasury
notes which have been redeemed in gold coin or in silver dollars, may be coined
into standard silver d'dlars or any other denomination of silver coin now author-
ized by law, for the purpose of replacing the coin used in the redemption of the
notes.

Skc. 7. That so much of the act of February twenty-eighth, eighteen hundred
and seventy-eight, entitled "An aut to authorize the coinage of the standard silver
dollar and to restore its legal-tender character," as requires the monthly purchase
and coinage into silver dollars of not less that two million dollars nor more than
four million dollars' worth of silver bullion, is hereby repealed.

Sec 8. That any gain or seigniorage arising from the coinage which may be
executed under the provisions of this act shall be accounted for and paid into the
Treasury as provided by existing law.

Sec. 9. Thbt silver bullion received under the provisions of this act shall be sub-
ject to the requirements of existing law, and the regulations of the mint service, gov-
erning the methods of receipt, determinins: the amount of pure silver contained,
and the amount of charges or deductions, if any, to be made.

Sec. 10. That it shall be the duty of the collectors of customs of the United States
to stamp with asteel stamp on every bar of silver bullion imported into the United
States the word "foreign." It shall be the duty of every assayer or refiner in the
United States, or any other person or firm, who may receive bars of silver stamped
" foreign," in case such bars are remelted or refined, to stamp with a steel stamp the
resulting bars "foreign." In case bars of silver stamped " foreign " are remelted or
refine-i with other silver products of the United States in such a way that it is not
possible to separate the resulting bars the exact product of such foreign silver,
it shall be the duty of such assayer or refiner, or other person or firm, to stamp
with a steel stamp on an amount of silver bars which shall be equivalent to the
arrount of foreign silver melted or refined the word " foreign." It shall be the
duty of every assaver or refiner m the United States, or any other person or firm,
who may receive coins of silver of the coinage of countries other than the United
StatPs, in case such coins are remelted or refined, to stamp with a steel stamp the
resulting bars "foreign." In case foreign silver coins are remelted or refined with
other silver products of the United States in such a way that it is not possible to
separate in the resulting bars the exact product of such foreign silver coins, it
shall be the duty of such assayer or refiner, or other person or firm, to stamp, with
a steel stamp, on an amount of silver bars which shall be equi valent to the amount
of forf'ign silver coins melted or refined, the word "foreign." Every person who
fail? to stamp bars resulting from the remeltingor refining of foreign silver bulhon
or foreigii silver coins with the word "foreign," and every person who falsely re-
move's this stamp or who by any art, way, or m^ans mutilates the stamp for the
purpose of prev*>nting identification of the bar.", shall be punihhed by a fine of
not less than one hundred dollars nor more than one thnusand dollars for each
bar: Provided, That nothing in this section shall be held to apply to silver products

extracted by the processes of Bmelting, amalgamation, and lixiviation or any other
metallurgical process, in the United States, from ores imported from foreign
countries.

Sec. 11. That nothing in this act shall be construed to prevent the purchase,
from time to time, as may be required, of silver bullion for the subriidiary silver
coinage, not, to affect the legal-tender quality of the standard silv«^r dollar.

Sec. 12. That a sum sufficient to carry out the provisions of this act is hereby
appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropria ed.

Sec. 13. That, all act3 ani parts of a'^ts inconsistent with the provisions of this
act a»e hereby repealed.

Siic. 14, That this act shall take eflfect thirty daya from and afcer its passage.

A minority report was made, signed by Mr. Bland and Mr. Wil-
liams, recommending free coinage as proposed in the following bill:

A BILL for the free coinage of silver, and for other purposes.

Be it enacifd by the Senate and House of lUpreserdatiufs of the United Slates of
America in Congress assembled, That from and after the passage of this act all hold-
ers of silver bullion of the value of fifty dollars or more, standard finene:JS, shall
be entitled to have the same coined into standard silver dollars of four hundred
and twelve and a half grains troy of standard silver to the dollar, upon like terms
and conditions as gold is now coined for private holders; that the standard silver
dollar heretofore coined and herein provided for shall be the unit of account and
etandard of value in like manner a« now provided for the gold dollar, and Khali be
a legal tender for all debts, public and private, excc-'pt where otherwise stipulated.

Sec. 2. That so much of the provisions of the act of February twenty-eighth,
eighteen hundred and seventy eight, entitled "An act to authorize the coinage of
the standard silver dollar and restore its legal-tender character," as provides for
issuing certificates on the deposit of silver dollars, shall be applicable to the coin
herein named; and so much of the said act of February twenty- eight, eighteen
hundred and seventy-eight, as provides for tne purchase of silver bullion to be
coined monthly into standard silver dollars, be, and the same is hereby, repealed.

Sec. 3. Tnat the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized to adopt such
rules and regulations as may be necessary to enforce the provisions of this act.

Meanwhile the silver question came under discussion in the Finance

Committee of the Senate.

This Committee was composed of the following Senators :

Justin S. Morrill, of Vermont, Daniel W. Voorhees, of Indiana,

John Sherman, of Ohio, James B. Beck, of Kentucky,

John P. Jones, of Nevada, Jno. R. McPherson, of Xew Jersey,

William B. Allison, of Iowa, Isham G. Harris, of Tennessee,

Nelson VV. Aldrich, of Rhode Island, Zebulon B. Vance, of North Carolina.
Frank Hiscock, of New York,

On the 25th of February, Mr. Jones, of Nevada, reported from the

Finance Committee to the Senate the following as a substitute for

other bills before the committee.

Be it enacted, eic^'Vhal the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to purchase
from time to time silver bullion to the aggregate amount of four million five hun-
dred thousand dollars' worth in each month, at the market price thereof, not
exceeding one dollar for tbreehundred and seventy-one and twenty-five one hun-
dreths grains of pure silver, and also to purchase sr.ch gold bullion as may be of-
fered at the Tr aeury or any subtreasury of the United States at a price not ex-
ceeding one dollar for twenty- three and twenty-two one hundreths grains of pure
gold, and to issue in payment for t-uch purchases of silver and gold bullion Treas-
ury notes to be prepared by the Secretary of the Treasury, in such form and of
such denominations, not less than one dollar nor more than one thousand dollars,
as he may prescribe, and a sum sufficient to carry into effect the provisions of this
act is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appro-
priated.

Sec. 2. That the Treasury notes issued in accordance with the provisions of this
act shall be redeemable on demand, in lawful money of the United States, at the
Treasury of the United States, or at the office of any assistant treasurer of the
United States, and when so redeemed shall be canceled ; and such Treasury notes
shall be receivable for customs, taxes, and all public dues, and when so received
may be re-issued ; and such notes when held by any national banking association
may be counted as a part of its lawful reserve.

Sec. 3. That the Secretary of the Treasury shall coin such portion of the gold or
silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act as may be necessary to
provide for the redemption of the Treasury notes herein provided for, and any
gain or seigniorage arising from such coinage shall be accounted for and paid into
the Treasury.

Sec. 4. That the gold and silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this
act shall be subject to the requirements of existing law, and the regulations of the
Mint Service, governing the methods of determining the amount of pure gold or
pure silver contained, and the amount of charges or deductions, if any, to be made.

Sec. 5. That so much of the act of February twenty-eight, eighteen hundred and
seventy-eight, entitled "An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dol-
lar and to restore its legal tender character," as requires the monthly purchase and
coinage of the same into silver dollars of not less than two million dollars nor
more than four million dollars' worth of silver bullion, is hereby repealed.

Sec. 6. That this act shall take effect thirty days from and after its passage.

Meanwhile petitions from all parts of the country asking for the
free coinage of silver were presented in both Houses.

The bills as presented by their respective committees to the House
and Senate contained provisions differing widely, which, from a par-
tisan standpoint, it was important to harmonize. The differences
were made .the subject of a joint caucus by the Kepublicans of
the two Houses. The disagreement was principally over the bullion
redemption feature of the House bill, and on this point no agree-
ment was reached, as certain of the Western Senators, led by Senator
Teller, refused to assent to this provision of the Treasury scheme.

The provisions agreed upon, however, by a majority of those at-
tending the caucus were incorporated in a new bill, which was intro-
duced in the House by Mr. Conger^ April 24th, and referred to the
Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures. The bill was there
amended so as to make the purchase $4,500,000 worth instead of
4,500,000 ounces, as in the first caucus bill, and making notes issued
therefor redeemable in ' ' coin ' ' instead of ' ' lawful money. ' ' The bill
as amended was offered in the House by Mr. Conger, June 5th , as a sub-
stitute for the original committee bill, which had been previously re-
ported to the House. To this substitute three amendments were agreed
upon, Avhich were all that could be pending, under the rules, at any
one time. A rule was formulated by Messrs. Reed, McKinley, and
Cannon, of the Committee on Rules, and reported to the House by Mr.
McKinley, which cut off all amendments except the three which
were agreed upon in caucus. But one adverse motion could be
made, and that was to recommit the bill to the Committee on

Joinage^ Weights and Measures with instructions to report back a
bill for free coinage. This motion was made by Mr. Bland. There-
fore, when the previous question was ordered it was made to cover
the amendments agreed upon, which were all that could be made
imder the rules, leaving the motion to recommit as the only motion
that could be made looking to further amending the bill. So no
opportunity was offered for a vote to strike out the bullion redemption
feature, which would any time have carried by a large majority.

CHAPTER VII.

The Caucus Bill Considered in the House.

When the House was called to order Thursday, June 5th, Mr,
McKinley, from the Committee on Rules, offered the following reso-
lution, on which he demanded the previous question :

Resolved, That upon the passage of this resolution the House proceed to coa-
sider House bill 5381, and said consideration shall continue until Saturday, June
7, when the previous question shall be considered as ordered at 3 o'clock P. M.,
on the bill and pending amendments, and that the House meet at 11 o'clock oa
Friday and Saturday next.

In the brief discussion on this vote, Mr. Blount said : '^ I hope the

gentleman from Ohio will allow me to offer an amendment." Mr.

McKinley declined to yield for an amendment, and insisted on the

previous question. The previous question was ordered, when forty

minutes were allowed under the rules for debate on the resolution.

Respecting the proposed vote, Mr. Blount said:

Mr. Speaker, the proposition in this order as reported from the Committee on
Rules provides that the previous question shall be ordered at 3 o'clock on Saturday,
and that the sessions of the House on to-morrow and next day shall begin at 11
o'clock, which is equivalent to three days' discussion, assuming the day to end at
5 o'clock. To that I have no complaint to make. I think this side of the House,
if this were all, would accept it as the best arrangement possibly they could make ;
but it goes further. I am informed that the chairman of the Committee on Coin-
age, Weights and Measures will be allowed to offer all the amendments which are
admissible under the rules of the House ; that when these are made there will be
left no opportunity on the part of the minority to offer any amendment on any
proposition. There will be left to the minority side of the House no opportunity
to ask this House to vote on free coinage.

Mr. Bland said:

I have no question whatever in my mind that if there was a fair opportunity for
debate and amendment of this bill a large majority of this House would be found
in favor of the unlimited coinage of silver. I suppose there is no doubt in the
House or in the mind of any member of it that that is the fact. In order to pre-
vent that fact from appearing upon the records of this House it is proposed, by a
gag rule, not only to gag the Republican members of this body who are in favor of
free coinage, but also nearly the whole Democratic party here, because, with about
fifteen or twenty exceptions, all of ns on this side of the House are in favorof free
coinage.

Mr. Speaker, it was agreed in the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures;,
it was the understanding in that committee when the bills were reported, that the
free-coinage bill, the substitute that has been reported here by the minority, should
be voted upon in this House. That would have given fair play, a fair opportunity
for intelligent legislation. But now, sir, I am informed by the gentleman from
Georgia [Mr. Blount] that this order prevents not only the offering of an amend-
ment like the proposition for free coinage, but any other amendment that may be
required to perfect the bill, unless it comes from the Chairman of the Committee
on Coinage, Weights and Measures, who, up to this hour, has shown his hostility
to every other bill than a measure coupling with it the demonetization of silver by
permitting bullion to go out of the Treasury as fast as it comes in.

Mr. Springer said:

This resolution is so framed as to prevent this side of the House, as well as the
minority on the other side of the House — for, gentlemen, you will have to take

the " gag law " yourselves, as well as this side, on this question, if you adopt this
proposition — it is so framed that no amendment is to be allowed in which the
friends of he free coinage of silver can present their views for a fair vote in this
House, and the members on this side, as well as tbe members from the North-
western States on the other side of the House, are completely gagged and cut ofl
from that opportunity.

Aijainst this I enter my solemn protest and denunciation. This action is in-
tended to prevent the representatives of the people from carrying out the demands
of the people on this question, and the constituents of those who vote.for this reso-
lution will repudiate them at the polls for their action. [Applause on the Demo-
cratic side.]

Mr. Williams, of Illinois, said:

It is a question in which the people of the country are vitally interested from
one end of the Union to the other, and the Representatives on this floor, a ma-
jority of them in this House, are in favor of the free coinage of silver. The very
fact that you refuse to allow a vote on that question is convincing proof before the
House and the country that you know they are in favor of free coinage, and
you dare not allow them to go on record on that question. [Applause on the
Democratic side.] Otherwise why do you fear a vote upon it? Why not allow
the question to come fairly before the House ?

Mr. Cannon claimed that the same amendments could be offered
under the proposed rule as without it.

Mr. McKiNLEY, replying to the strictures from those opposing the-

vote, said:

Mr. Speaker, it is necessary after the storm of denunciation that we have heard
from the oiher side of the House to return for a moment to the proposition that is
really before us, and the meaning, and purpose, and effect of that proposition, if it
shall be adopted by a majority of this House. It is a resolution, Mr. Speaker, to
give to the House of Representatives an opportunity to pass some silver legislation,
and to give to the country a silver bill which the majority of this House believe
will be fully responsive to the general sentiment of the country. [Applause on
Republican side]. It is, Mr. Speaker, to give to the House of Representatives an
opportunity to pass a bill which shall take all of the silver bullion of the United
States — all of the silver product of the United States — and utilize that silver bullion
for monetary purposes and put it in circulation for the movement of the business of
the country. It is to give to the people of the country, not $2,000,000 monthly,
but to give them four and one-half miilions monthly, or two and one-half millions
more than what is now provided by the existing law.

Mr. Blount asked :

Why should not my friend consent to a single amendment on the single propo-^
sition, that of free coinage, and have a vote upon it?

Mr. McKINLEY. The gentleman cannot drive me from my position. [De-
risive laughter on the Democratic side.] The House of Representatives are here
to do public business. And you gentlemen on the other side of the House could
not have been very anxious for free coinage when for four long years, when you had
control of the Houee of Representatives, you never were able to pass a bill upon
that subject. [Applause on the Republican side of the House.

* * * -f » * *

Mr. Speaker, talk about throttling the will of the minority by the majority in
theHouse of Representatives. Why, one man up at the White House a few years
ago silenced the majority in the Forty-ninth and Fiftieth Congresses. [Applause
on the Republican side]

Mr. McCO.VIAS. 1 want, in the little time that is accorded me, to correct the
statement of the gentleman from Illinois [Mr Springer]. He made a statement
here as to the vote. Now, in the Forty-sixth Congress, where there were forty-
two Democratic Senators and thirty-three Republican Senators, free coinase was
reported adversely from the Committee on Finance by Mr. Bayard on Februarv 3,,
1880 — that the bill for free coinage ought not to pass. [Applause on the Republican.

aide.] Again, in the Forty -ninth Congress, under Mr. Cleveland's administration,
there was an immense Democratic majority in this House. I hold in my hand
the vote of that tremendous Democratic majority upon the proposition in a bill
which was submitted for free coinage; and when (with almost two-thirds your
■way) yon had a chance to pass it in this House — the vote, when it came up on the
28th of April, 1886, wfs 126 for free coinage and 163 against free coinage, and 68
Democrats voted dead against free coinage.
Mr, BLAND. And 100 voted for it.

The resolution was then adopted by a vote of 120 yeas to 117 nays,

as follows :

YEAS— 120.

Adams,

Cheadle,

Harmer,

Moffitt,

Simonds.

Allen, Mich,

Clark, Wis.

Haugen,

Moore, N. H.

Smith, W. Va.

Atkinson, Pa.

Cogswell,

Henderson, 111

. Morey,

Smyser,

Atkinson, W. Va.

Coleman,

Henderson, la,

, Morrill,

Snider,

Baker,

Comstock,

Hitt,

Morse,

Stephenson,

Bayne,

Conger,

Hopkins,

Mudd,

Stivers,

Beckwith,

Craig,

Houk,

O'Donnell,

Stockbridge,

Belden,

Dalzell,

Kennedy,

O'Neill, Pa.

Struble,

Belknap,

Darlington,

Kerr, Iowa,

Osborne,

Sweney,

Bergen,

Dingley,

Ketcham,

Payne,

Taylor, 111.

Bingham,

Dolliver,

Kinsey,

Pay son,

Taylor, Tenn.

Bliss,

Dorsey,

Lacey,

Perkins,

Taylor, E. B.

Blount,

Dunnell,

La Follette,

Pickler.

Thomas,

Brewer,

Evans,

Laws,

Post,

Thompson,

Brosius,

Farquhar,

Lind,

Raines.

Turner, Kans.

Brower,

Flnley,

Lodge,

Randall,

Yan Pchaick,

Browne, Va.

Flick,

Mason,

Ray,

AVade,

Buchanan, N. J.

Flood,

McComas,

Reed, la.

Walker, Mass.

Burrows,

Frank,

McCord,

Reyburn,

Wickham,

Barton,

Gear,

McCormick,

Rife,

Williams, Ohio,

Butter worth,

Gifford,

McDuffie,

Rockwell,

Wilson, Ky.

Caldwell,

Greenhalge,

McKinley,

Rowell,

Wilson, Wash.

Cannon,

Hall,

Miles,

Russell,

Wright,

Caswell

Hansbrough,

Milliken,

NAYS-117.

Scull,

Yardley.

Abbott,

Cobb,

Hayes,

Moore, Tex.

Skinner,

Alderson,

Connell,

Haynes,

Morgan,

Springer,

Anderson, Kans.

Cooper, Ind.

Heard,

Morrow,

Stewart, Tex.

Bankhead,

Cowles,

Hemphill,

Mutchler,

Stockdale,

Barnes,

Orisp,

Henderaon.N.C Gates.

Stone, Ky.

Bartine,

Culberson, Tex. Herbert,

O'Ferrall,

Stone, Mo.

Barwig,

Dargan,

Hermann,

O'Neall, Ind.

Tarsney,

Biggs.

Davidson,

Holman,

O'Neill, Maes.

Tillman,

Blanchard,

DeHaven,

Kelley,

Outhwaite,

TownsendjColo.

Bland,

Dockfry,

Kilgore,

Owens, Ohio,

Tracey,

Breckinridge, Ark

. Dunphy,

Lane,

Parrett,

Tucker,

Brickner,

Edmunds,

Lanham,

Paynter,

Turner, Ga.

Brookshire,

Elliott.

Lester, Ga.

Peel,

A'andever,

Brown, J. B.

Ellis,

Lewis,

Perry,

Yaux,

Brunner,

Enloe,

Magner,

Pierce,

Walker, Mo.

Buchanan, Va.

Featherston,

Manser,

Quinn,

Waehington,

Buckalew,

Fitch,

Martin, Ind.

Reilly,

Whitthorne,

Bynum,

Flower,

McAdoo,

Richardson,

Wike,;

Candler, Ga.

Forney,

McCarthy,

Robertson,

Will cox,

Caruth,

Fowler,

McClammy,

Rogers,

Williams, III.

Chipman,

Funston,

McClellan,

Rowland,

Wilson, W. Va.

Clancey,

Goo<l night,

McCrearv,

Sayers,

Clarke, Ala.

Grimes,

McRae, '

Seney,

■Clunie,

Hatch,

Montgomery,

Shively,

7.)

Before debate began, and after the reading of the bill (H. R. 5381)
as originally reported from the Committee on Coinage, Weights and
Measures, Mr. Conger offered the substitute already referred to, and
known as the caucus bill, which was then tead, when Mr. McComas
was recognized to offer an amendment. Mr. Taylor, of Illinois, was
•ext recognized to offer a second amendment, and Mr. McDonald to

;ffer a third, which exhausted the right, under the rules, to amend.
''/Lr. Bland sought recognition to offer an amendment but was denied
;he floor for this purpose. Thus in spite of the claims made by Mr.

Jannon and Mr. McKinley when the ''gag " rule was under dis-
lussion, no amendments were allowed to be offered except those pre-
viously agreed upon by the majority.

Debate on the silver question followed until Saturday. Many able
-peeches were delivered on both sides, most of which have been

printed and circulated. Space here will permit only brief extracts

•earing directly on contested features of the bill.

Mr. Payson, of Illinois, expressed on the floor of the House the
-eutiments of enough Republicans to have stricken out in the House
ihe bullion provision by an overwhelming majority. He said:

In the Forty-seventh Congress I had the honor to serve upon the Committee
on Coinage, Weights and Measures. Before that committee was a bill providing
Jor the suspension of the silver coinage. My colleagues upon that committee and
royself gave the matter as thorough investigation, perhaps, as the average of Con-
>;;re88ional committees give to an important subject, and I had the honor in that
■^Jongress to make the report for the committee, against the suspension of silver
(ioinage, and to submit some views which I then entertained, which were indorsed
by the committee and which I have entertained from that time until now. Those
views were the result of as careful and candid an investigation of that question,
which was then new to me, as I have ever given to any subject. The views I
4hen entertained and now entertain were in harmony with what I believe to be
the principles announced by the last, Republican convention, held in the city of
Ohicago. I remember as an auditor in that convention hearing the distinguished
yentleman from Ohio [Mr. McKinley], the chairman of the Committee on Ways
E.nd Means, read the platform in the great Auditorium building, in which that
vonventioa was held. I do not forget, when the ringing words came from his lips
lo an audience then conscious, as a matter of recent recollection, of the position of
the Cleveland administration in regard to silver, the response of that audience
when he read the declaration :

*' We, the Kepublican party, believe in the use of gold and silver as money and
we denounce the present Democratic administration for its hostility to silver," etc.

The words that thus fell from his lips, as he read that platform to that as-

-embled multitude, met with an enthusiastic response that I shall never forget

dO long as I live. The words uttered expressed the sentiments of that magnificent,

representative Republican audience. I did not then thiuk, Mr. Speaker, that

within about two years from that time I should be asked to vote in the House of

'epresentatives for a bill coming from a Committee on Coinage,. Weights and

'ieasures, a majority of which was composed of members of the same political

artj' to which I belong, which not only praciicalh/, ay, absolutely, demonetizes silver a^

I metal nnd establishes upon the statutes of the Union a gold standard, and not that only,

-■'^t in addition to that wipes from the statute-book the only legislation that we have for the

Anage of the standard silver dollar. [Applause. ]

I believe in the doctrine which was announced by the Republican national
convention; I stand for it here and now; and I express the confident belief that
out of ihe debate which is goiiig on here and out of the consideration of this ques-
tion Mill conae a bill from a Republican House of Representatives and a Repub-
lican Senate which in letter aijd spirit will be up to the declarations of the party
at its last national convention and meet the public demands.

*******

As Republicans know, I have opposed these bills. I oppose this bill No. 9678
because, in the firs*, place, it proposes to treat silver simplv and purely as a mer-
chantable commodity and to place upon the statute-books, until Congress shall
change it, an open declaration that gold, and gold only, shall be the standard recog-
nized by the supreme law of the land as the mnasure of values.

*******

* * * I am opposed to this bill because it repeals the only provision in the
statutes requiring tlie coinagfi of the standard silver dollar. * * *

I oppose it, Mr. Speaker, fot another reason, which waf, perhaps, involved to a-
certain extent in a statement I made a few moments aeo, and which is retained in
the bill now upon the Speaker's table as a su^^stitute for this bill, and upon which
a vote will first be taken. That is the feature of bullion redemption of the Treasury
notes thus outstanding. * * *

But, Mr. Speaker, I expect to give this substitute my support — in a contin-
gency. I hope the opportunity may be presented in some form or other under the
rules of the House, or under the special order, by which a motion to strike out
the "bullion-redemption" feature of the bill may be submitted to the House for
consideration. I say I hope that will be done. I hope that some method will be
devieed by which it may be done. But if it fails and it Is impossible to get it out
of the bill, I shall still give the substitute bill my support, reluctantly, I confess,
Vjecaase I do not believe in voting for something to which I am opposed, and
therefore I do it with regret, but for this reason : I believe in the necessity of some
kind of legirtlation on this important subject, and I am confidently advised and
expect, upon assurances that I rely upon, as stable and as trustworthy as any pre-
dictions of. men, that if the bill shall pass here, even in its present form, the matter
will be corrected elsewhere.

Mr. REILLY. That will eliminate the most serious objection, in my opinion.

Mr. PAYSON. Yes, I believe it will be so done. I would eay, therefore, that
I do not vote without expectation, without belief; in other words, if I vote for
this substitute I do it with the belief that it is not a finality with reference to this
matter; (and let me be understood) if I did not so believe, this substitute would
never receive my support on this floor.

Mr. BYNUM. Suppose there is no amendment in the Senate ?

Mr. PAYSON As I have said, I have no more doubt that there will be then,
that I am standing here, from assurances that I have had from gentlemen on both
Bides — perhaps I ought not to say where.

Other Republicans were equally pointed in thejr opposition to the
bullion-redemption clause of the bill, and many voted for it with the
declaration that they expected it to be so amended in the Senate as to
strike out the bullion-redemption feature.

Mr. Connell, of Nebraska, as a Republican, protested warmly against
" the gag in free speech hy lohich they prevented a fair discussion,,
or the right to propose honest amendments."

But the position of Mr. Connell and others will be best shown by

the following quotations from Mr. Connell's speech:

While a considerable number like myself were in favor of free and unlimited
coinage of silver we stood ready to compromise on a measure that would eliminate
from the present bill its bullion:redemplion proviso, which degrades and continues
to demonetize silver and makes mere warehouse receipts out of the Treasury notes
authorized to be issued. It looked at one time as though this might be done.

I do not propose to jrive away any secrets of the caucus ; I do not propose to tell
aay tales out of school ; I only repaat what has been a matter of general publica-
tion in the public press, when I say that a nunaber of amendments, onb of which
eliminated from this bill its objectionable bullion clause, were oflf'^red by the gen-
tleman from Ohio [Mr. McKinley], and probably would have been accepted as sat-
ififactory to all the members on this side of the House, but for the objections andpro-
U'sts of the. Speaker,

I would have been very glad to have seen a silver bill introduced and put through
this House purely as a Republican measure. This might have been done had gen-
tlemen on this sideof the House heeded the timely suggestions of the distinguished
and able gentleman from Ohio [Mr. McKinley], and accepted the amendments
which he proposed in a spirit of compromise. Wtiile in favor of the free and unlim-
ited coinage of silver, I, with other members of similar views, would have been
willing to accept this bill with the amendments proposed, believing that time
would justify our belief that with the brand of demonetization removed, the price
-of bullion would soon reach |1 for 371.25 grains of pure silver, and result practi-
cally in free and unlimited coinage.

Mr. Kelly, of Kansas, made a short but strong speech, not only

defining his own position but pointedly stating the whole question,

and especially the objection to bullion redemption.

Mr. KELLY said :

Mr. SpjiAKER : I am in favor of the free coinage of silver. This bill, as I look at
it, is a jugglery of words to demonetize what is left of silver coinage. Under the
law as we have it the Secretary of the Treasury, at present price of silver, can coin
five and a half millions a month ; he is compelled to coin two millions a month.
Under this bill he is not compelled to coin any, and as under present law he has
never coined any more than he wns compelled to, it is likelv un<ier this law he
aever would coin any. This bill is in the intpresi of the creditor class ; it is against
the debtor class. It is an abandonment of the pledge made in tne Republican
platform upon which this Admioistration came into power.

I shall vote to recommit it to the committee, with instructions in favor of free
coinage; if that proposition fails I shall vote against the bill, and I shall do it
with the full knowledge that a majority of this House would, if opportunity were
given it, vote for free coinage ; and I shall do it with the hope tliat < pportunity
will be given it. I shall do it with the knowledge tbat ttie common people of this
•ountry understand this question, and with the further knowledge that they de-
mand free coinage of silver.

**********

Mr. Speaker, from the foundation of this Government up to 1873, the coinage of
silver and gold as money in the ratio of 1 to 16 stood on an exact equality.
The coinage of both was free and unlimited, and when coined by the Government
was money, and a legal tender for debts. In 1873, when silver war^ demonetized,
the silver in a silver dollar before coined was worth a trifle more than the gold in
a gold dollar before coined. No tne asked that it be demonetized ; no one has
since been found who knew it was going to be; no one has since been founH who,
when he voted for the act demonetizing silver, knew that the act contained any

such provision ; the President who approved the act did not know it,

**********

Mr. Speaker, a frank statement is always to be admired. The gentleman from
Massachusetts [Mr. Walker] in his able and lengthy argument in the advocacy
of this bill, says there is gold coin enough in the world to do the businei-s of the
world, and that there is gold coin enough in this country to do the buf-iness of
this couQtry. From his standpoint he is coaeistent ; were I in favor of a gold
standard alone, this bill would certainly recei>'e my support. Tais bill does what
Grover Cleveland advised Congrei-s to do, it absolutely demonetizps silver, except
it be already coined; it repeals ttie law we now have, requiring the Secretary of
the Treasury to coin $2,000,000 worth a month, or at his discretion to coin $4,0(j0,-
000 worth per month. *

This bill degrades silver, makes the conditions so that under the bill silver can
never be equal with gold, and then facetiously says, when it shall be equal silver

coinage shall be free ; and at this point my humorous friend from Maryland [Mr,
McCoMAs], who favors the bill, offers his amendment, which in eflfect says, when
this impossibility shall occur then silver purchases shall cease.

^^ * ■* -X- * -x- ■»

Mr. Speaker, I know not how well the people of the East have considered, dis-
cussed, and studied this question, but so far as the people of the great State that I
have the honor in part to humbly represent on this floor, there is scarcely a
school-hou^e out of the ten thousand within her borders that has not been the
forum of discussion and debate on this question. It has been handled in all its
phases and the verdict has been unanimf)U3 and emphatic that the act demonetiz-
ing silver in 1873 was a great outrage on the debtor class ; that it has pilfered and
is yet pilfering from the debtor, and handing to the creditor.

The following is from Mr. Funston's speech, in the same line :

The bill evidently is a compromise between the East and the West, and follow-
ing the rule of all other compromises, is unsatisfactory to very many. And in fact,
Mr. Speaker, after listening to this discussion for two days, I have come to the con-
clusion that were all who have apologized for the bill in favor of recommitting it
to the committee with instructions to bring in arfree-coinage bill, we would have
a free-coinage measure passed by this House before another week. I, for one, am
ready and willing and shall at the proper time vote to recommit this bill, with in-
structions to bring in a free-coinage measure ; and if gentlemen on this side of the
House who have been apologizing for this bill will vote with me we will have free
coinage. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

Mr. Williams, in summing up his speech, said :

Mr. Speaker, the Windom bill and substitutes oflFered by the Republican caucua
are wrong in principle, and no number of amendments will make either equal to
a free-coinage bill in my judgment. I have already said that our farmers feel a
special interest in the free coinage of silver. It must be remembered that in large
cities, where banks are plentiful, and deposits have a multiplied use, much of the
business is transacted by the use of checks and other substitutes for money, while
in agricultural districts the small dealings of farmers are carried on in money and
require the actual presence and use of money in the trade. Hence a contraction
of the currency is more quickly and severely felt among the farmers. Money is
the life-blood of the nation, and what we want is more of this life-blood in circu-
lation.

The following is from an able speech by Mr. Post, of Illinois :

When Warren Hastings, arraigned for cruelly plundering the defenseless peo-
ple of India, reflected upon the constant demands made upon him by the greed
of the East India Company and the limitless power he had exercised as the gov-
ernor of India, he naturally exclaimed that he was amazed at his own moderation.
When the owners of realized wealth consider how completely the monetary legis-
lation of modern civilized nations has been conceded to them as representatives
of great commercial interests, they might well exclaim that they wonder at their
own moderation.

*******

The FuNDftOLDEBS AND Bankees' Plot.

In 1868, European bankers estimated that if the single gold standard could be
universally introduced the circulating medium of the world then existing would
suffer a sudden reduction of 38 J per cent, for which there could be no compensa-
tion in an increased supply of gold, and therefore the value of gold would rise.
The objection to this course was then clearly pointed out, that as an increase of
circulation is always beneficial, so the destruction of a large part of the existing
circulating medium would be injurious to the true interests of mankind — a blow
to the advance of civilization and to social progress.

How did it happen that the people of the United States, who are as keenly
alive to their own interests and who so carefully watch legislation, permitted the
demonetization of silver and the adoption of the gold standard? The truth is
they did not know what had been done ; legislators did not know what they were

doing. The demonetization of silver was the most peculiar legislative transaction;
that ever occurred in this country, and it is to be hoped that no similar traneac-
tion will be attempted in the future.

If any one connected with it appreciated what its effect would be it was not
avowed, and it is charitable to suppose that no member of the Congress which

Saseed the law hadthe slightest idea that the law would create consternation and
istrust throughout the civilized world, and that within twenty years the most
important question before Congress would be how safely to restore the coinage law
as it existed prior to 1873.

Silver the Standahd Pkioe to 1873.

In 1873, as an officer abroad, it was my duty to certify to the value of a depre-
ciated paper currency in the standard coin of the United States. That standard
was, and always had been, from the beginning of the Government, " the American
or Spanish silver dollar." I have mentioned the United States in a list of double-
standard countries because we have free coinage of gold and silver, and the popular
opinion placed it there. But the only legal standard of value was the "American
or Spanish silver dollar," and every certificate filed in our custom-houses prior to
1873 proves that fact. The gold dollar wasL a legal tender just like the greenback,
but had the advantage of the greenback in also having a foreign exchange value,

Mr. Townsend, of Colorado, spoke strongly for free coinage,

saying :

It will be noted that silver bullion stays with the commodities, and to every one^
except creditors and those having fixed incomes, it is evident that the prosperity
of the country will not return and the downward course of prices will not be
arrested until silver is restored to its money power, and the bimetallic standard
shall bring a steady measure of value instead of the present constantly appreciating
standard of gold.

Mr. Steel, explaining the effect of the act of 1873 on mortgage

debts, said:

When he made the mortgage, one-half bushel of wheat, 5 pounds of cotton, or
1^ bushels of corn would pay a dollar on the debt. When it matured, if he
wanted to pay a dollar he had to sell 1} busheh of wheat, 2} bushels of corn, or
12 pounds of cotton. Such was the effect of the demonetization of silver ; the
suspension of its free and unlimited coinage. The volume of currency ceased
thereby to be governed by the natural output of the mines, and greedy man wag
given the power of regulating or fluctuating it for his own purposes. What an
immense power this is. How prone is human nature to use and abuse power !

Mr. Anderson, of Kansas, made'tlie ,"point that the increased use
of silver would tend to diminish the value of the'gold unit.

Mr. Walker, of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures,
made a speech against the bill, from which the following extracts
are taken :

Now, I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that more money means more misery. [Laugh-
ter and applause.]

Mr. ROGERS. I will take a little of the misery.

Mr. BUNNELL. That kind of misery we all like.

Mr. PERKINS. We would all be willing, I think, to stand a little of it.
[Laughter.]

Mr. PICKLER. Let us suffer. [Laughter and applause.]

Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I want to say to you that money in a proper
form and of standard value can only be used to a limited amount. It is true of
this as of everything else, that "a eufliciency is enough ;" and when you go beyond
that amount you can not profitably use the surplus money any more than you can
use anything that is more than a sufliciency. The money, therefore, that is
BoflBcient to perform the business or exchanges of the country is all that is necea-

sary or that can be used. You might illustrate this by taking the case of a rail-
road. You can not use a railroad profitably beyond the necessities of the traffic
on the road. When you farnish the facilities for transporting all that is brought
to the road for transportation, all that you furnish beyond that is surplus, and is
useless and is owned at a loss; hence, as far as money is concerned, you can not
use a dollar beyond what is necessary to make the exchanges of commerce.

Mr. Walker has singular ideas on economics, and particularly

about money.

In the firtt place, money has no place whatever in economics. We never talk
-about money in economics ; it is the exchange of the products of labor, and money
is an incident. You might destroy all the gold and silver in this country to-night,
and waking up to morrow morning you would not be hurt one iota; our business
would go on juat the same. For fifteen years we did not have gold or silver in
this country as money. Now, do not misunderstand me in this statement. I say
^' if gold and silver were destroyed past all redemption the world over " it would
make no difiierence; I do not mean if gold and silver were demonetized and green-
backs put in their place for that is just as difit-rent a thing as black is from white.
I am talking about the destruction of money out of the world. There is not a man
here who does not know that if all the coin were actually destroyed we would
never know the difference; we would go right along as now.

Are we to understand from Mr. Walker that if half the world's
money were destroyed it would not affect prices or business ? Such
arguments answer themselves.

The following extract is from a speech by Mr. Lind :

All agree that the immediate cause of our depressed condition is the prevailing
low prices ot all comcnofHt'es, and especially agricultural productions. This lower-
ing of prices commenced in 1873-74 and has continued with but few interruptions
to date. It has affected all classes injuriously (except tbe money lenders) ; but
the farmers the most severely of all The reason of this is plr.in. The farmer's
profits (wagef) depend on the value of the 8urplu«( of his crops after paying for
machinery, store bills, and other expenses. While it is true that a bus^iel of
"wheat will go as far as it ever did in exchange for commodities, it is also plain that
the surplus, the profit, or wage-fund, is more than one third less than it was in
1873 for the purpose of paying taxes, interest, mortgage indebtedness, or purchase-
money on land.

. To illustrate, we will assume that the wheat crop of the average Minnesota farm
was 1,000 bushel in 1873, and the same in 1889. The amount of wheat required to
pay for machinery, to p^y store bills, and other expenses, and for seed was the
same as la&t year — say 700 bushels. According to the table of prices which I will
submit further on, the surplus of 300 bushels was worth in New York in 1873,

$393, and in 1889 only |267.

* *****

In 1873 a bushel of wheat would buy 33.41 grain of gold ; in 1889, only 20.89
grains.

*******

The only feature of the bill which does not meet my full approval is the proviso
to the second section which permits the withdrawal of bullion. This power
might, with the connivance of the Secretary, be used for improper purposes. I shall
ask to have the bill amended in this respect, but if I fail I know it will be don©
in the Senate.

It could hardly be expected that politics would be kept out of the

debate on so important a question, and, as the following extract

shows, it was not :

Mr. KERR, of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman who has just taken his seat
[Mr. Bland] has made some complaint about "gag law" as applied to that side of
the House. The gentleman ought to have become used to gag law, because during
the last four years the men who have had control of the House on that side of the

Ohamber have so managed affairs that the gentleman has been completely
silenced daring all that time, and his demand for silver has been suppressed. He
ought to have become used to gag law, after that discouraging experience. The
last administration not only did not permit any proposition to come from the com-
mittee of that side of the Hou^>e looking toward the free coinage of silver

Mr. BLAND. Will the gentleman allow me to correct him? He does not wish
to mak" a misstatement.

Mr. KERR of Iowa. No, I do not wish to make a misstatement.

Mr. BLAND. In the Forty ninth Congress, during Cleveland's administration,
I introduced a free coinage bill, tl-.esame one I have now, word for word and line
for line. I advocated it on this floor, and it received 96 Democratic votes and only
30 Republican votes. If you want to go into polities about it, that is the fact. I
urgwd it during that administration, and I will eay that I am no Democrat or Re-
publican on this subject. I am in favor of silver as against party or pereon, or
anything else. [Applause.]

Mr. Wickharu, in an able speech, in which he laid down funda-
mental principles which no one undertook to answer, and which no
one could overthrow, said:

A competent treatment of the legal constitution of money must proceed by a
careful scrutiny of just what it is that cocsfitu'es the equity and efficiency of
money in its main uses and purposes. In order lo that inquiry let U3 first define
those uses. Money has been devised to serve as an instrument for appraising or
measuring out, as by common measure, all goods for the purpose of transfer and
distribution — for buying and selling, and also to be a form or mode into which
<^i,pital, resources, or purchasing power can be converted for convenient trau sport,
for safe keeping or loan upon interest. Now, ia each and all of these uses or
modes of employment, there is by universal consent one chief and paramount
excellence, one single supre'oe criterion of merit, su^h overoiastering importance
a3to sink every other feature quite out of mentionable worth.

I m?.ke bold to defy denial of the truth of my proposition, or belittleroent of its
central importance in this whole discussion, when I aflarm that a dollar which
stands approximately steadfast and constant to the customary and familiar pur-
chasing power or value as expressed in the great staples for food and fabric, and
which will give the strongest assurance.^ of continuing stability in the future, is,
from the standp int of legislation the best dollar, and that legal constitution of
standard money which will best secure such constancy is the desideratum of states-
manship. I denounce as unqualifiedly false and fraudulent the proposition not
indeed, explicitly affirmed and overtly supported by anybody who knows how to be
ashamed, hut still constantly insinuated and injected into the popular utterances,
on the subject, that the mos^va'uable dollar is the best dollar, and that it is wise
legislation to foster increase in the value of money. I deny that it is either wise
or jast. On the contrary, I affirm that it is grossly unjust in relation to outstand-
ing contracts and disastrous to the future of production, for legislation to commit
all oblii^ations and all the products of toil to the tender mercies of an appreciated
and appreciating dollar.

No! In the view of the lawmaker, that is not the best dollar which has the
greatest commercial value, nor necessarily the one which has the least ; but rather
that one which shows the greatest constancy as a valuator of goods. This would
seem to be a self-evident proposition, and one pointing the way to a solution of
the main question. Which one of the two money mf tals, then, is it that has de-
parted from the fair dollar value? In ticking on a market relation of 22 to 1, in-
stead of 16 to 1, which metal has b^en misbehaving in respect to constancy?

Let us not be deceived by words and appearances — by a conventional nomen-
clature born of the vicious legislation of the pa-t. A statute compdling the mint
to give out a coin dollar for every equivalent weight of bullion brought to it will,
of course, fix and maintain 1 he price of that metal up to exactly the minting rate,
and will give to it what to the shallow view seems a magic property of stabilir.y of
value; but "hat fixity is merely a fix'ty in the price of a meial in terms of itself.
Under free coinage of silver that metal could never fall in price below the Ifgil
par wifh its own coin. This is not du3 to any property in the metal. It would
take place in precisely the same manner with any metal to which mi^ht be given
unlimited minting privileges.

Mr. Bartine, of Nevada, made a finished and scholarly speech^
from which the following brief extract is taken :

This bill brings before you for consideration the "great battle of the standards,"'
the 80-cailed silver question, which has agitated the public mind for some fifteen
or twenty years, both in Europe and America. The action of this Congress may
finally determine the question, so fraught with significance, whether eiiver shall
be completely restored to its former position as money, or the people of this^
country be for all time limited to what has been called the golden "yard-stick ""
as a measure of a'^aIuo. The Committee on Coinage'is composed of gentlemen
entertaining very diffeirtnt views on this subject. Some of them believe that gohi
is the only safe measure of value, and that silver is a dangerous element in our
monetary system. Others believe that gold standing by itself is a most unjust,,
uncertain, and fluctuating standard, and that the complete remonetizalion of silver
is an imperative necessity. Some would suspend the use of silver entirely, except
in a subsidiary way ; others would have free coinage tomorrow, and still others,
would pursue an intermediate course and approach free coinage by degrees. But
I believe that all recognize the fact that for several years past the sentiment of
this country has been growing and strengthening in favor of silver ; and that at
the present time there is a very general demand for a largely increased use of that
metal, In complying with such a demand, it is obvious that each member would
be influenced largely by his personal views, and make the concession in the line
which he deemed wisest and best. One who has no confidence in silver would
naturally favor its use in such a way as to do the least possible harm. One who has>
every confidence in silver would seek to utilize it in such manner as to do the
greatest possible good.

My own opinions are of the most pronounced and radical character. Such study
as I have been able to bestow upon the subject has convinced me that the double
standard, comprising both gold and silver, is in every way superior to a standard
consistingof either one alone. I believe that the United Sl:ates can establish bi-
metallism, and by simply decreeing freeicoinage maintain the two metals at a fixed
ratio as long as such law is upheld. More than this, I believe it to be the duty of
this Government to do so; and I but voice the sentiment of our whole Western
country when I express the opinion that the legislation of 1873 which struck silver
from the pedestal which it then occupied, which said to every debtor in this broad
land, •' Henceforth you shall pay your debts in gold alone," was the gravest and
most unconscionable wrong ever perpetrated upon a free people by a Government
of their own choice. The bill under consideration is a step in the direction of cor-
recting that wrong, and as such I extend to it a welcome. But I find myself unable
to give to it an unqualified indorsement, and further on, if time will permit, I shall
take occasion to point out some of its objecdonable features.

Mr. Lanham, in a speech on the question, said:

Until the passage of the resolution providing for the consideration of the bill
now before the House, it was little dreamed by the people that a full, fair, and
free opportunity would be denied their Representatives to vote upon the distinct
and independent proposition for the free and unlimited coinage of silver, in a reg-
ular and appropriate way, nor was it expected that any Representative could es-
cape the responsibility of committing himself to the record, as either in favor of
or in oppneiiion to that measure.

But, strange to say, under the peculiar parliamentary administration which now
op3rates and arbitrarily dictates the procedure of the House, it appears that only
such a measure and such amendments as it may suit the pleasure of the majority
to allow shall be presented or considered, and this, too, despite the fact that the
minority of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures have regularly
submitted their views and proposed a substitute for the pending bill, and the fur-
ther fact, as stated by the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Bland], that it was agreed
by that committee that a vote should be had in the House on such substitute.
*******

Mr. Speaker, there has never yet been made any satisfactory answer to the com-
plaint of the people srrowing out of the demonetization of the silver dollar by the act
of 12ch February, 1873. Before the bar of public opinion this piece of real legis-
lation has been repeatedly arraigned. Popular indictment has described it aa a
fraud and a crime. The method and circumstance of its enactment have been.

criticised and denounced with all the vehemence of an outraged and indignant
people, emarting under the keenest sense of injustice and betrayal of confidence.

No one has been found who has been able to successfully explain or defend it.
Upon the statute book it stood for a half decade as a taint and reproach upon Fed-
eral legislation. It has never been fully eradicated, nor will it be until the law as
it was aforetime shall be restored to its ancient position and revived ip its prittine
vigor. Somethinft is due a people who believe their trust has been abused — some
reparation for a wrong, whether wickedly perpetrated or inadvertently committed,
ought, in all good conscience, to be made.

No senf-ible man will deny the abiding popular grievance and dissatisfaction en-
gendered by the fa'it that a constitutional and standard coin, sanctioned by reason of
i(8 strength for fourscore years, was tbus suddenly and indeliberately, if not covertly
and fraudently, dropped from its rightful pla-^e and office in our monetary system.
It is doubtful if any Congressional action on financial question, since the formation of
our Government has provoked sreater discontent or occasioned more profound dis-
trust of legislative integrity. It has never been acquiesced in by the people. It never
will be. No accessary post factum support of the injury done orreeult int^^nded, by
whomsoever tendered and contributed, will ever receive popular ratification.

The following paragraph from the speech of Mr. Taylor, of Illiaois,

shows with what persistence palpable errors are promulgated.

Mr. Taylor said :

I know of no reason why the silver producer should have preference over the
farmer who grows wheat. I know of no reason why the Gavernment should pur-
chase the product of the silver mine at 100 cents when it is worth only 75 cents.

Such utterances, however, do little more than show careless
thinking. Does Mr. Taylor really believe there will or can be a dif-
ference between coined and uncoined silver under free coinage?

Mr. Conger, in his speech, June 7th, also said :

Free coinage at once means still more. It means a profit of 26 cents on eveiy
dollar's worth of bullion taken to our mint. It means that the bullion owners of
this country can take their $50,000,000 worth of bullion to the mint and walk away
with $63,000,000, pocketing at once a clear profit of $13,000,000, and the tax-payera
mustpavit; while under the present practice, or under the proposed law, the
Government makes whatever seigniorage there is. And last year this amounted
to over $9,000,000, and since 1878 it ha? in the aggregate amounted to $53,0[ 0,000,
which has been covered into the Treasury and been used to pay the current ex-
penses of the Government.

Undoubtedly any one holding silver bullion at the time of the
passage of free coinage would make a profit on it if bullion was below
1.29. But does Mr. Conger mean to say that under free coinage pro-
ducers of silver would continue to make 26 cents profit, or that there
would be any difference, after the mints were open to free coinage,
between coined and uncoined silver? Such talk does not indicate
good thinking. When everybody can have silver coined into money
as freely as he now can have gold coined, how can there be a difierence
between the market price and the mint price of silver?

The question is not whether he who mines silver has a right to
have it coined into money. The real question is as to the right of
everybody to have recourse to both metals for money in the discharge
of all obligations and to carry on business.

Mr. Cannon also made the same unguarded assertion. He said:

In other words, if free coinage were written upon the s'atute-books any man

could so <o one of our mints with a dollar's worth of the worlds BiWer bull! in, and
on depositing it there, could get back for that bullion a silver dollar and have 27
cents lefc.

One would hardly have expected such a statement from one who
voted for free coinage in the Forty-sixth Congress. However, Mr.
Cannon seems to have been carried away with bullion redemptioa.
He said in his speech at the close of the debate :

The Republican party when it met in national convention in 1888 resolved in
favor of both gold and silver for money. I slood on that platform tben and I
stand on it now. I have, by vote in ihe House, by speech, by precept and exam-
ple always favored the use of the two metals, not gold alone, nor silver alone, but
both, for money, and I will not knowingly vote for any bill or any amendment
that I am sati.-fied will bring us to the use of either to the exclusion of the other.
Having said that much, I want to eay novv that in the exercise of my best judg-
ment I shall vote fjr the substitute offa'-ed by the gentleman from Iowa [iMr.
Conger] because I believe that at the present tion, uuder the present conditions,
it is the best legislation that we can obtain which will insure the use of both
metals for money. I may be mistaken. I have been mistaken. But my judg-
ment is that way, and now for a few moments I will give a reason for the faith

that is in me. ^ ., ,, ,,, ., , i,-

First what does this substitute do? * * * It provides that the silver bullion
purchased under the provisions of this act shall be subject to the requirements of
existing law, and so on, and that, upon thedemaad of the holder, the notes issued
in payment for this bullion, at the discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury (the
two minds meeting), shall be exchanged for bullion, dollar for dollar, at t tie market
price. Now, there we come to a stumbling-block to some gentlemen. They say
the bdl would b^ verv good if it were not for that provision. In my opinion, la
the present condition of things, that provision, is a wise one.

Mr. Dingley,of Maine, usually a close and careful thinker, seems also
to have got somewhat mixed up on the question of coinage. He said:
Gold is coined at its bullion value. The 25 8 grains of gold, nine-tenths fine,
which i^ found in a gold dollar, is worth exactly the same before it is coined as
after. The comcidence of the coinage value witQ the bullion value makes free
coinage of gold not only just anl proper, but also ecoaomically sound and safe.

The inquiry has oft«n been made ia this debate by gentlemen who desire free
coinage ot silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, " Why not treat silver as you do gold?"
The e'videat answer is that this would necessitate t'le coining of silver at a ratio of
22 to 1, instead of 16 to 1, as you desire; that in order to treat silver as we do gold
it would require 567 grains of 8ilve^ nine-tenths fine, instead of 412^ grains, to be
placed in each silver dollar; for 412.i grains of silver before coinage is worth only
72 cents, wtiile the purpase ia to have it worth 100 cents after coinage.

Frfte coinage for silver at the rate of 16 to 1 is impossible so long as the bullion
value of silver is so much lees than the coinage value, unit ss it is proposed to have the
Government take all the silver that the owners of silver bullion will bring them,aiid
pay them 25 per cent, more for it than it will bring in the markets of the world.

Mr. Dingley admits that there can be no difference between coined
and uncoined gold while coinage is free. How can there be a dif-
ference any more between coined and uncoined silver, when coinage
is free, no matter what ratio it is coined at?

Whether silver coined at the ratio of 16 to 1 of gold will remain
at a parity with gold at that ratio, is another question and depends
on other laws. It will depend in no small degree on the effect of
free coinage of silver on the value of gold. The demonetization of
silver had the effect to materially increase the value of gold, and its
Tcmonetization will undoubtedly operate to decrease its value.

The error we are here combatting is the notion that there is or
can be, under free coinage, a difference between coined and uncoined
silver, which the producer of silver will gain. Mr. Dingley, on reflec-
tion, will surely not persist in so absurd a claim.

Much more sensible is the following from the same speech :

Mr. Spaaker, it is impossible in the present status of silver to dispose of the
silver question otherwise than tentatively, and in many respects unscientifically.
We are simply waiting in the hope that the gulf now existini^ between silver bul-
lion and gold will in du« time be bridged. We hope and believe that this bill by
using more silver as money in such a way aa to maintain the parityof our gold and
silver coins will aid in bridging this gulf when free coinage can safely come. But
it can not safely come now.

Mr. Brewer, too, seems to have been subjected to the same con-
fusion of ideas — ■

To-day the bullion value of the silver dollar is about 78 cents, or 22 cents less
than its coined value. Shall we give that 22 cents to the interest that is support-
ing this lobby, that has tried to force the interest of their employers upon our at-
tention, or shall we save that 22 cents for the benefit of the people? The bill
under consideration, if it shall become a law, will save it for the people, while the
free coinage will give it to the bullion producer.*

When anybody can have bar silver converted into the form of
coin free, how can there then be a difference in the value of an ounce
or a pound of silver in the form of bars and in the form of coin ?

Such talk is evidence of poor thinking.

The following statesman-like plea for the bill, as the best at-
tainable under all the circumstances, was made by Mr. McKinley :

Now, Mr. Speaker, what I rose to say among other things, is that we can not
have ideal legislation. It is not possible. Practical men do not expect it. Prac-
tical statesmen can only strive for it, and secure the best which is attainable. It
is impossible, in any legislation, that may come before this or any legislative body
to have it entirely and in every part meet the views of every individual member.
That is utterly out of the question. And so, Mr. Speaker, I shall support this
measure, although it does not in all of its provisions meet my entire approval. I
would have this bill different if I could, but it represents the purpose and the idea
not fully, it is true, which I have touching the silver legislation which isrequire^',
and I shall vote for it, because it is in the right direction, and embodies much
which is good, and all the interest of the people. What does it do? First, it
utilizes every dollar of the silver product of the United States, and to that extent
it is just to the silver producers of this country. Second, it makes a demand
for that silver product, and if the friends of silver are right, it will so increase
the value of that product as to bring silver in parity with gold. It provides
further that the very instant silver and gold come together, or the very instant
that the bullion value of silver shall be equivalent to the coin value of silver, that
very instant you have free and unlimited coiuage of silver in the United States.

So I say, Mr. Speaker, that whatever may be our views about this point or about
that point, touching this whole subject of silver, we get by this bill the use of our
entire silver prodact, and we make that product into money that is safe in the
hands of the people and will be good for all time wherever and by whomsoever
held. Mr. Speaker, no man should hesitate between the two millions a month
tkat we have now and thefourandabalf millions a month that we shall have under
the proposed law. We get an increased volume of money, with safety to the
Government and the citizen. Pass this bill and what do we have? An increase
of $30,000,000 annually of circulation to be put out among the people and into the

* In the first edition this and the quotation above it were erronsously attributed to
Mr. McKinley, by which injuttice was uninteniionally dene him.

avenues of businese. Vote aeainst this bill and, in my judgment, you vote that
there shall be no legislation upon the silver question at tbis session of Congress.
That is what I fear it means. We know we cannot have free coinage now, except
in the manner as provided in the bill. You know you could not have it when
you were in the majority in this House You know you cannot get it now. You
do not mean to get it. Therefore, I say that to defeat this bill means to defeat
all silver legislation and to leave us with two millions a month only, when by
passing this bill we would have four and a half millions a month of Treasury
notes as good as gold.

With the speech of Mr. McKinley debate closed, and the House
was brought to a vote. The debate on the whole was able, and was
participated in by many others,, but space prevents further quotations.

Mr. Bland gave notice that he desired to move to recommit the bill

with instructions to report in its stead a free coinage bill, and as

jBoon as in order to do so, offered the following resolution :

Resolved, That the bill be recommitted to the Committee on Coinage, "Weighta
and Measures, with instructions to report back a bill for the free coinage of silver.

The yeas and nays were demanded. This being the test vote, it

is here given in full :

YEAS— 116.

Abbott,

Chipman,

Hatch,

Morgan,

Stockdale,

Alderson,

Clancy,

Hayes,

Morrow,

Stone, Ky.

Allen, Mich.

Clarke, Ala.

Haynes,

Gates.

Stone, Mo.

Allen, Miss.

Cobb,

Heard,

O'Farrell,

Tarenev,

Anderson, Kans.

Connell,

Henderson.N.C.O'Neall, Ind.

Tillman,

Bankhead,

Cooper, Ind.

Herbert,

Outhwaite,

Townsend, Colo

Barnes,

Cothran,

Hermann,

Owens, Ohio

Tucker,

Bartine,

Cowles,

Holman,

Parrett,

Turner, Ga.

Barwig,

Crain,

Kelley,

Peel,

Turner, Kans.

Biggs,

Criep,

Kilgore,

Penington,

Vandever,

Blanchard,

Culberson.Tex

. Lane,

Perkinks,

Walker, Mo.

Bland,

Davidson,

Lanham,

Perry,

Washington,

Blouat,

De Haven,

Lee,

Pierce,

Wheeler, Ala.

Breckinridge, Ark

;. Dockery,

Lester, Ga.

Reilly,

Whitthorne,

Breckinridge, Ky,

, Edmunds,

Lester, Va.

Richardson,

Wike,

Brick ner,

Ellis,

Lewis,

Robertson,

Wilkinson,

Brookshire,

Enloe,

Mansur,

Rogers,

Williams, 111.

Buchanan, Va.

Featherston,

Martin, Ind.

Rowland,

Wilson, Mo.

Bullock,

Forney,

McClammy,

Sayers,

Wilson, W. Va.

Bynum,

Fowler,

McClellan,

Seney,

Yoder.

Candler, Ga.

Funston,

McCreary,

Siaiveley,

Carter,

Gibson,

McRae,

Skinner,

Caruth,

Goodnight,

Montgomery,

Springer,

Catchings,

Grimes,

Moore, Tex.

NAYS— 140.

Stewart, Tex.

Adams,

Cogswell,

Hansbrough,

Moffitt,

Scull,

Arnold,

Coleman,

Harmer,

Moore, N. H.

Sherman,

Atkicson, Pa.

Comstock,

Haugen,

Morey,

Simonds,

Atkinson, W. Va.

Conger,

Hemphill,

Morrill,

Smith, W. Va.

Baker,

Craig,

Henderson, 111

. Morse,

S cnyser.

Bank?,

Dalzell,

Henderson, la,

. Mudd,

Snider,

Bayne,

Dargan,

Hill,

Mutchler,

Stephenson,

Beck with.

Dingley,

Hitt,

Nnte,

Stivers,

Belden,

DoUiver,

Hopkins,

O'Donnel),

Stockbridge,

Belknap,

Dorsey,

Houk,

O'Neil, Mass.

Struble,

Bergen,

Bunnell,

Kennedy,

O'Neill, Pa.

Sweney,

Bingham,

Dunphy,

Kerr, la.

Payne,

Taylor, 111.

Soothman,

Boutel'e,

Bowden,

Brewer,

Brosius,

Brower,

Browne, Va.

Buchanan, N. J.

UurrowB,

Burton,

Butter worth,

Caldwell,

Cannon,

Caswell,

Cheacile,

Clark, Wis.

Elliott,

Evani",

Ewart,

Farquhar,

Finley,

Flick,

Flood,

Flower,

Frank,

Gear,

Kt tc'ham,

Kinsey,

Lacey,

La Foliette,

Laid law,

Laws,

Lind,

Lodge,

Maish,

Mason,

Pay sou,
Tickler,
Pugsley,

Taylor, Tenn.
Taylor, E. B.
Thomas,

Quackenbush, Traoey,

Geisscnyiainer, McComas,
Gest, MeCord,

Gifford, McCoimick,

Greenhalge, McDaffie.
Grosvenor, McKinley,
Hall, Miles,

Quinrt,

liainrs,

Ray,

Reed, la.

Revburn,

Rile,

Rockwell,

Rowell,

Russell,

San ford.

Sawyer,

Scrauton,

Van Schaick,
Venable,
Wade,

Walker, Mass.
Wallace, N. Y.
Wickham,
Wiley,

Williams, Ohio,
Wilson, Ky.
Wilson, Wash.
Wright,
Yardley.

Classified politically this vote stands :

Yeas, IKJ — Republicans. 15; Democrats, 101.
Nays, 140 — Democrats, 13; Republicans, 127.

The bill was then passed, yeas 135, nays 119.

Divided politically this vote stands, yeas 135, all Republican; nays,

119, Democrats 112, Republicans 7.

The Republicans voting (or Bland's motion to recommit, were.

Messrs. Bartine, of Nevada ; Carter, of Montana ; Hermann, of Oregon ; Town-
send, of Colorado ; DeHaven, Morrow and Vandever, of California ; Connell, of
Nebraska ; Anderson, Fauston, Kelley, Perkins, and Turner, of Kansas ; Feather-
ston, of Arkansas, and Allen, of Michigan.

The thirteen Democrats voting against Mr. Bland's motion to re-
commit, with instructions to report back a bill providing for free
coinage, are —

Dargan, of South Carolina; Turner, of New York; Maish, of Pennsylvania;
liainn.ofNew York; Wiiey,of New York; Geissenhainer, of New Jersey; Mutchler,of
Pennsylvania ; Tracey, of New York ; Elliott, of South Carolina ; Hemphill, of South
Carolina; O'Neill, of Massachusetts ; Vena ule. of Virginia; Dunphy, of New York.

The seven Republicans who voted against the bill with the bullion

Tedemption feature in it were :

Bartine, of Nevada ; Anderson, of Kansas ; Kelley, of Kansas ; Carter of Mon-
tana ; To wnsend, of Colorado; Turner, of Kansas ; Rockwell, of Massachusetts.

The following is the caucus bill as it passed the House. The two
features of the bill which attracted most attention were bullion re-
demption and free coinage when silver reached parity with gold:

THE BELL AS IT PASSED THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES.

(H. R. 5381. June, 1890.)

aN act directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes
thereon, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America
in Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to
purcbase from time to time silver bullion to the aggregate amount of four million
ive hundred thousand dollars' worth in each month, at the market price thereof,
jot exceeding one dollar for three hundred and seventy-one and twenty-five one
hundredths grains of pure silver, and to issue iu payment for such purchases of

silver bullion Treasury notes of the United States to be prepared by the Secretary
of the Treasury, in such form and of such denominations, not less than one dollar
nor more than one thousand dollars, as he may prescribe, an^l a sum sufficient tc-
carry into effect the provisions of this act is hereby appropriated out of any money
in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated.

Sec. 2. That the Treasury notes issued in accordance with the provisions of this
Si^t shall be redeemable on demand, in coin, at the Treasury of the United States,
or at the offi<"e of any assistant treasurer of ihe United Strates, and when so re-
deemed may be re-issued ; but no greater or less amount of such notes shall be
outstanding at any time than the cost of the silver bullion then held in the Treas-
ury purchased by such notes ; and suoh Treasury notes shall be a legal tender in
payment of all debts, public and private, and shall be receivable for customs, taxes,
and all public dues, and when so received may be re issued; and such notes when
held by any national banking association may be counted as a part of its lawful
reserve : Provided, That upon demand of the holder of any of the Treasury notes
herein provided for the Secretary of the Treasury may, at his discretion and under
such regulations as he shall prescribe, exchange for such notes an amount of silver
bullion which shall be equal in value at the market price thereof on the day of
exchange to the amount of such notes presented.

Sec. 3. That the Secretary of the Treasury shall coin such portion of the silver
bullion purchased under the provisions of this act as may be necessary to provide
for the redemption of the Treasury notes herein provided for, and any gain or
seigniorage arising from such coinage shall be accounted for and paid into the-
Treasury.

Sec. 4. That the silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act shall
be subject to the requirements of existing law and the regulations of the mint ser-
vice governing the methods of determining the amount of pure silver contained,
and the amount of charges or deductions if any, to be made.

Sec. 5. That so much of the act of February twenty- eight, eighteen hundred and
seventy-eight, entitled " An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver
dollars and to restore its legal-tender character," as requires the monthly purchase
and coinage of the same into silver dollars of not less than two million dollars.,
nor more than four million dollars' woith of silver bullion, is hereby repealed.

Sec. 6. That whenever the market price of silver, as determined in pursuance of
section one of this act, is one dollar for three hundrt d and seventj'-one and twenty-
five hundredths grains of pure silver, it shall be lawful for the owner of any silver
bullion to deposit the same at any coinage mint of the United States, to be formed
into standard silver dollars for his benefit, as provided in the act of Jemnary
eighteenth, eighteen hundred and thirty-seven. And purchases of silver bullion
shall be suspended while it is being so deposited for coinage.

S£c. 7. That upon the pasf age of this act the balances standing with the Treas-
urer of the United States to the respective credits of nati )nal banks for deposits
made to redeem the circulaiing notes of such banks, and all deposits there-
after received for like purposes, shall be covered into the Treasury as a mis-
cellaneous receipt, and the Treasurer of the United Statfs shall redeem from the
general cash in the Treasury the circulating notes of said banks which may come
into his possession subject to redemption ; and upon the certificate of the
Comptroller of the Currency that fuch notes have been received by him and
that they have been destroyed and that no new notes will be issued in their
place, re-imbursement of their amount shall be made to the Treasurer, under such
regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury maj' prescribe, from an appropriation
hereby created, to be known as " National bank notes: Redemption account," but
the provisions of this act shall not applj'^ to the deposits received under section
three of the ?ct of June twentieth, eighteen hundred and seventy-four, requirint^
every national bank to keep in lawful money with the Treasurer of the United
States a sum equal to five per centum of its circulation, to be held and used for the
redemption of its circulating notes ; and the balance remaining of the deposits so
covered shall, at the close of each month, be reported on the monthly public del';
ttatemert as debt of the United States bearing no interest.

Sec. 8. That this act shall take effect thirty days from and after its passage.
Passed the House of Representatives June 7, 1890.
Atie»t:

EDWARD McPHP:RSON, By C. S. MARTIN,

Cto'^^ Chief tier >.

CHAPTER VIII.

The House Caucus Bill in the Senate.

The bill as it passed tlie House contained two important features —
the bullion redemption clause and the section providing for free coin-
age when silver reached parity with gold on our ratio, or $1.29 an
ounce. The bill went to the Senate June 9th, and on motion of Mr.
Teller was ordered to be printed and lie on the table. On the fol-
lowing day it was, on motion of Mr. Morrill, referred to the Com-
mittee on Finance. It was reported back to the Senate by Mr. Mor-
rill June 11th with sundry amendments, and with notice that
he would at the proper time offer it as a substitute for the bill then
pending in the Senate. It was ably discussed on both sides till
June 17th, when it was put upon its passage.

Meantime remonstrances, directed principally against the bullion-
redemption feature of the bill, were sent in from all parts of the
country, especially from the West. The question was also fully dis-
cussed by the press.

The following from the Washington Post of June 7 shows some-
thing of the interest taken in this measure :

THE BIMETALLISTS FIRM.

They are not to he Deceived by Evasive Legislation.

VIEWS OF FKANCIS G. NEWLANDS.

THB HOUSE OP REPRESENTATIVES SIMPLY JUGGLING WITH THE SILVER QUESTION —
BULLION REDEMPTION ONE OF THE OBJECTIONABLE FEATURES OP THE HOUSE MEAS-
URE — IF CONGRESS FAILS TO PASS A SATISFACTORY SILVER BILL THB NATIONAL SIL-
VER COMMITTEE WILL CALL A NAt!oNAL SILVER CON\'ENTION.

[From the Washington Post, June 7, 1890.]
The action of the House Republicans at their conference and de^ate in the
House has added fresh interest to the silver question, and there is considerable
curiopity on the part of the public to learn how the compromise measure is re-
garded by the bimetallists. When a Pod reporter called on Mr, Francis G. New-
lands, the member of the National Silver Committee from Nevada, he was found
in the midst of a ditmantling process at his home, as he is preparing to return to
Nevada to spend the summer months.

"Have the silver men given up the fight?" repeated Mr. Newlands, in reply to
the reporter's question. " Not at all. We are very much in earnest in this matter^
and do not intend to run at the first fire of the gold men."

" Then you do not regard the measure proposed in the caucus of the House Re-
publicans as a substantial recognition of the requests of the silver men ?'
" They are

SIMPLY JUGGLING

with the silver question in the House," said Mr. Newlands, " and as a result a bil^
apparently providngfor the increased use of silver, but really demonetizing it^
has been placed before the House, and it is to be rushed through after a debate of
a day and a half, and without the privilege of offering amendments."
"But will the bimetallists not make an effort to amend this bill ?"
"I am unable to say what will be the action of the silver men in the House.
The only opportunity to teet their strength will be on a motion to recommit. If a
motion to recommit is made 80 as to provide for free coinage and is lost, then

there can be no test on the bullion-redemption feature. In that event I think all

the Hilver men in the House hIiouKI vote aji^aitist the hill. It reduces silver to a

commodity and deprives it of its cliief element of value as a money metal."

"Then you do not regard the bill as bein^ as much of a compromise as has been

claimed for it ? "

" The bill is a

^Qj^Qj^j^^^j^j^jp GOLD mbarubb;

nothing more or nothinK lesp. It containH in it the germ of destruction of the
bimetallic principle. Silver bullion is to be uned simply as a socurity for the cer-
tificates ipsued ujton it. The $4,500,000 worth punihased the first month can be
redeemed the next on the surrender of the certificates representiuf^ it. The Pame
bullion can be sold during the same month and ajjain redeemed the next month.
Should the increased purchase of bullion go on until $100,000,000 is accumulated
the entire amount could be withdrawn at any time. The currency would thus be
cr)ntracted in this amount and a large amount of bullion thrown on the market.
Thus the power to

CONTRACT THE CURRENCY

is given to a single man. I predict that if this bill passes the Treasury will be but
a conduit through whi,;h Knglaud will eventually draw her silver for use in Icdia.
Dut the gt»Id monometallisla who arc pushing this measure say this power will
never be cxercined. Do you doubt that if (^leveland, Manning, and Jordan were
iri power it would be exercised? Whv is this power asked for and insisttd uptm
if not to bo oxerc!H«'d ? Can any one doubt that it will be exercised at some time
under some Secietary or by some system of jugglery ? The bimetallists insist that
whatever gf^ld or silver tioes into the TreaNury shouhl come out only as money,
either in the shape of actual coin or certificates calling for coin. No better cur-
rency can be dcvisod than that wlii(;h is backed dollar for <lollar by gold ami
silver coin in the Treasury. If there is enough gold and silver money in the world
how is It that so large a voluuie of papijr money — either fiat or credit- exists?"

" Do you think the silver men in the Houae will stand together regardless of
party lines? "

"1 don't know. ,,,„^ ,.^^^^. ^^,„„.

is being applied to the Republicans, althimgh the caucus was declared to be not
binding on the participants. It was a meeting for conference only. The business
of the IlouBo, by reason of the jiower of the Committee on Kules, is under the
cnntrni nf three men — Keed, (-annon, and McKinley. McKinley is a bimetallist
and thinks free (coinage vav be safely entered upon, but will not make a fight for
his views, lieed and ("annon are pronounced for bullion redemption or, what is
the same thing, the gold standard. They are strong men — leaders of the party;
and wield more po^er than all the rest of the House. I am tohi that in the con-
fereni e, when McKinley ma<le his motion to strike out the hullion-rederaption
clause, Heed op|)o.sed it in a vigorous speech, in which he declared we must adhere
to tlio cold standard, otherwise w'e would approach the level of China and India."

"Then you do not *;oncede the argument has force ?"

"No; there wa« as much difference between the

UNITKO STATES ANT) CHINA

V)efore silver was demonetized as there i-i now. Does any one suppose that the con-
dition of India or China would be changed if they were to adopt a gold standard ?
Mr. Meed might as well advise us to refrain from eating rice lest we become Ciiina-
inen. I hope the bimetallistn of the I lotise will act upon their convictions regard-
less of party and not delegate their right to think and vote to leaders however
able. If they have an oppor.'unity let them vote for free coinage. If this is not
obtainable let them vote, if the opportunity is otlVred, to strike out the bullion-
re<Ie!nption feature. If tliese fail, let them kill the bill, and let, the gold men in
the Uepnblican party who are maftiuerading as the fri»nd8 of silver, be held
responsible by the country for their violation of tha^ plank in the

UKI'UHMCAN NATIONAI, TLA'IKORM,

vrhich condemns Cleveland tor his effort to demonetize silver and declares for the
uee of both gold and silver as money."

*■ K * ii ^- * *

It is strange what infiuence the opinions of the bankers have on the average
man in reference to this monetary (luestion. As a rule the banker knows nothing
of monetary science. A good banker should have knowledge of human nature,

»1

knowledfto of valnep, <h«i caution to roo Dint evi»ry lonn is amply Hoourpd, and tlip
'.lonptTvaiiHiii to reHint tho ttirii|>t:ilionH to rink. Mcwt of IliiMii do not knownflnuich
)f iiionetary acioncti — tlio it<lati<ui of tlio volnino of money to {M>pniiition, tlio **f-
fect of the t'hantro of Htimdanl, and llio n*HiiitH of (•ontraction and oxpanHion — hh
tho Hvera^o public mai\- Talk wilii on«i of tluwn on tliiH hul)joc.t and \\n will look
wiee, wa^ hiu head ominoiiHly, acid nay notliin).': Iluit is wordiv of tin* naino of ar-
f!Vinteut. I'orlhe hint twclvo ytMiiHtiu' l)unk('iHluiv»0)ccn pro<\j«;tin)' di!<aHl»ir from
l.^ie coinage of Bilver, Imt it han not tak»Mi place. Tlieiy (trowdtd

Mlt. CMCVItl.ANM WITH FICAIW,

and arc doiihtlcHH indncncMoi;; many able and wt^ll-intcntioncd men who think
they ouj^ht to know HomcthinjJton the hubjorl. Why, wti mi|Li;ht hh well b(» f^uidisl
by railroad preai<lcnt^ aw <o the contri)! <»f railroitdH, and (.t'im arui watt^r dirt^ctorH
as to the rc)j;nhvti(>n of the price of water, iiH by hankerH in relation to monetary
legislation. It \» a part of lIuMr hiiHiiieHS to make money Hcan'e and d«iar, ho aH to
increaae It^ pIl^!lmHin^r power. If the volume of money m only Hudiciently con ■
iracicd the bank«irH will Iih abhi (o own the worhl."

Mr. NewlandH wan very nmch in carncMt in dim iMHinu; tho money (piontion, and
jn referrin^j (o that, claas uf men who, in onler to Hccure pitrona^.'je or Hccure favor
with the leatlcKM of tlicir parly nnrremler thciri-onvictioiiH and imperil t be inlertwl.
(»f their conHtitui'iitn, nm'd lan|j;naj.;e more viyoroiiH than diplomati<'. lie aluo took
occaBioD to refer in uncomplimentary tertnH to tlume mend)erH who dod(.;((d the
"vote in the Ilouse on Tlinr-idav when the etlort was made to re<'otnmit the hill.
However, Mr. Newlands in very Han^'iiine tlial ihe hilvc^r men will yet Huccnied.

The (ollowiiifij is also IVoiu the ('ditorijil coiiiiiK'iils ol" IIk! Washing-
ton Post of Juno t :

The National I'/xecntive Silver (-ommittee \h now in HeHHion in VVaHhinfyton,
walchin;; th(> pro^'renn of Hilvcr leKJulalion, which, within the hiHt few dayH, HeeniH
fo have taken a Hort of W.dl Street twist.

Apprehennivo that a HatinlacMory meawiire may bo dofeat<vl either by combina-
lionHor throu;j;h tlu; inlliien(re ot tlie mouoinetalliHlH, the coinmilteci Iuih det(*r-
iiain('<l in that «!vent to <;all a national silver c^onveidion, in wbicih the !''armerH'
Alliance and till other induHtri-il origan i/.ationH and bimel.allif-ts fijenerally will be
invited to parti<;ipat<\ uiib ri view to-Hinkin^ politi<;H for the time bninKaml mak-
ing tho Hilvc^r (pH'Htiori JlnMuintiolliii)^ inMUe in fnt.nre ciimpiiitiUM, particularly in
vhe next(!oni;»((HHi<ui}d electioMH, ami advimn^c that nobody be hupported forCon-
i^rCBH or tlio I'reflidency who ia not in favor of the lull rentoration of hilver to the
Dliure it oc«;upied an a moiujy metal prior to tlui act of IS7i{.

Votes in tiii'; Sionati-;.

Tho liist vole ill I ho S(!tiato was on I. ho ainoniiinont. propoHiMl hy
tho i''inanoo (JoniiniMot! Htrikino- out, iho provi.sion in tho IIohho hill
inakino- tlic not(;s I'lill h^^al tondoi',

Mr. tStowai't caUod for l,ho yoas atxl iiayH.

The volo on atrikin;^ out the Kj^al toiKhir [irovision wuh a.s follows:

YKAH-14.

Aldrich, Carlinle, OJibHon,

Blair, ('Imndbir, dray,

Blodgett, I'Vye, Halo.

NAYS- 50.

Allen, <'oke, Hi).i;i!:inH,

.VUison, (!o!(piilt, MiMco(;k,

iJarbonr, (^iilloni, lnj,'.vllH,

Bate, l»aniel, .Ion«'Hof Ark.

Jierry, Dolpb, .lonoH of Nov.

Bailor, ICiiHtiH, Kentia,

Oall, lOvartH, Milcliell,

'Jamoron, (Joorge, Moody,

Oaeey, (iorman, Mort;>in,

Oockrell, HearHt, I'addock,

So the atnondnuint was riyoctod.

llarriH,

Morrill,

1 1 oar.

I'latt.

Mcl*herson,

I'aHco,

Spooner,

I'ayne,

Stewart,

I'ierce,

SUKrkbridge,

riuinb,

Teller,

I'ower,

Tiirpie,

KatiHom,

VoHl,

Iten^jan,

Voorhi en,

SanderH,

Walthall,

Sawyer,

Wai-bl)iirn,

Sherman,

Wolfiott.

Vote on Bullion Redemption.

The VICE-PRESIDE N^T. The next amendment will be stated.

The next amendment of the Committee on Finance was in section 2, line 13,
after the word "reaerve," to strike out the following proviso :

" Provided, That upon demand of the holder of any of the Trf asury notes herelti
provided for the Secretary of the Treasury may, at hia dicretion and under such
regulations as he shall prescribe, exchange for such notes an amount of silrer
bullion which shall be equal in value at the market price thereof on the day of
exchange to the amount of snch notes presented."

The result was announced — yeas 57, nays 7 ; as follows :

YEAS— 57.

Aldrich,

Casey,

Harris,

Pasco,

Stockbridge.

Allen,

Cockrell,

Hawley,

Payne,

Teller,

Allison,

Coke,

Hearst,

Pierce,

Turpie,

Barbour,

Colquitt,

Ingalls,

Piatt,

Vance,

Bate,

Cullom,

.Tones of Ark.

Plumb,

Vest,

Berry,

Daniel,

Jones of Nev.

Power,

Voorhees,

Blair,

Eustis,

Kenna,

Ransom,

Walthall,

Blodgett,

Evarte,

McPherson,

Reagan,

Washburn,

Butler,

George,

Mitchell,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Call,

Gibson,

Moody,

Sawyer,

Cameron,

Gorman,

Morgan,

Spooner,

Carlisle,

Gray,

Paddock,

NAYS— 7.

Stewart,

Chandler,

Hale,

Hoar,

Morrill,

Sherman.

Frye, Hiscock,

Vote on Stkiking Out the Conditional Free Coinage Provision.

The VICE PRESIDENT. The next amendment will be stated.

The next amendment of the Committee on Finance was to strike out section i
as follows:

" Sec. 6. That whenever the market price of silver, as determined in pursuance
of section 1 of this act, is $1 for 371.25 grains of pure silver, it shall be lawful for
the owner of any silver bullion to deposit the same at any coinage mint of the
United States, to be formed into standard silver dollars for his benefit, as provided
in the act of January LS, 1837. And purchases of silver bullion shall be suspended
while it is being so deposited for coinage."

Mr. GORMAN. I ask for the yeas and nays on that question.

The result

was announced — yeas 16,

nays 46 ; as

follows :

YEAS— IG.

Aldrich,

Evarte,

Hoar,

Sawyer,

Stockbridge,

Allison,

Frye,

Morrill,

Sherman,

Washburn.

Chandler,

Hale,

Piatt,

Spooner,

Dawes,

Hiscock,

NAYS 46.

Allen,

Cockrell,

Gray,

Morgan,

Teller,

Bate,

Coke,

Harris,

Paddock,

Turpie,

Berry,

Colquitt,

Hearst,

Payne,

Vest,

Blair,

Cullom,

Ingalls,

Pierce,

Voorhees,.

Blodgett,

Daniel,

Jones of Ark.

Plumb,

Walthall,

Butler,

Dolph,

Jones of Nev.

Power,

Wolcott.

Call,

Eustis,

Kenna,

Ransom,

Cameron,

George,

Mander-son,

Reagan,

Carlisle,

Gibson,

Mitchell,

Sanders,

Casey, ,

Gorman,

Moody,

Stewart,

So the amendment was rejected.

Vote on the Ten- Year Limit.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The next amendment will be stated.

The next amendment of the Committee on Finance was, in section 7, line

Chandler,

after the word " passage," to insert " and terminate at the expiration of ten years
therefrom ; " eo as to make the sectioa read :

"Sex;. [8] 7. Ttiat this act shall take effect thirty days from and after its paasage,
and terminate at the expiration often years therefrom."

Mr. HARRIS. I ask for the yeas and nays.

The yeas anH nays were ordared.

Mr. EVARTS. 5lr. Presideat, I rise to ask from the committee upon what
ground or baneficial or substaatial idea this amendment is proposed. It is not
castomary for us to limit our laws unless under soma very special reasoas for so
lirnitm? them, and unless I hear some gojd reason to the contrary I shall vote
against this amendment.

The Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

The roll-call was concluded ; and the result announced — yeas 4,
nays 64; as follows:

YEAS-4.
Edmunds, M

NAYS— 64.
Harris,
Hawley,
Hearst,
Higgine,
Hiscock,
Hoar,
Ingalls,
Jones of Ark.
Jones of Nev.
Kenna,
Manderson,
McPh-'rsoa,
Mitchell,

Only four votes in favor of the limitation to ten years.

Mr. PLUMB. I move to strike out the first section and insert what I send to
the desk.

The Chief Clehk. It is propoied to strike out section 1 of the bill and insert
in lien thereof:

"That from and after the passage of this act the unit of value in the United
States shall be the dollar, and the same may be coined of 412^ grains of standard
silvor, or 25.8 grains of standard gold; and the said coius shall be eqaally legal
tender for all sums whatever. That hereafter any owner of silver or gold bullion
may deposit the same at *ny mint of the United States to be foraaed into 8;andard
dollars or bars for his benefit and without charge; but it shall be lawful to refuse
any deposit of less value than $100, or any bullion so base as to be uasuitable for
the operations of the Mint,"

Mr. BLAIR. I ofTdr an amendment to the proposed amendment of the Senator
from Kansas, which is, to add at the end of the second section :

"Nor shall the amount of silver coined and issued from the mints of the United
States be more than $5,000,000 for each calendar month."

The VICE-PRESIDhCNr. Ta« question is on agreeing to the amendment pro-
posed by the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Blair] to the amendment of the
S-nator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb].

Mr. HARRIS. I ask for the yeas and nay 3 on the amendment to the amend-
ment.

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

The result was announced — yeas 12, nays 46 ; as follows :

Allen,
Blair,
Casey,

Allen,

Colquitt,

Aliieon,

CuUom,

Bate.

Daniel,

Berry,

Dawes,

Biair,

Dolph,

Blodgett,

Eustis,

B a tier.

Evarts,

Call,

Frye,

Oameron,

George,

Carlisle,

Gibson,

C'^sey,

Gorman,

Cockrell,

Gray,

■Coke,

Hale,

rill.

Sherman.

Moody.

Sawyer,

Morgan,

Spooner,

Paddock,

Stewart,

Pasco,

Stockbridge,

Payne,

Teller,

Pierce,

Turpie,

Piatt,

Vance,

Piumb,

Vest,

Power,

Voorhees,

Pa?h,

Walthall,

Ransom,

Washburn,

Reagan,

Wolcott.

Sanders,

YEAS— 12.

Chandler,

Dawes,

Edmunds,

Frye,
Hale,

McPherson,
Paddock,

Spooner,
Washburn,

NAYS-

-46.

Colquitt,

Ingalls,

Plumb,

Turpi©,.

CuUom,

Jones of Ark.

Power,

Vance,

Daniel,

Jones of Nev.

Pugb,

Vest,

Eaalie,

Kenna,

Ransom,

Voorbees.

Gforge,

Mitchell,

Reagan,

WaltbalK

Gibson,

Moody,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Gorman,

Morgan,

Sawyer,

Harrip,

Morrill,

Siewart,

Hearst,

Payne,

Stock bridge,

Hiscock,

Pierce,

Teller,

Aldrich,

Allison,

Bafe,

Berry,

Blodgett,

Call,

Cameron,

Carlisle,

Cockrell,

Coke,

The VICE-PRESIDENT. Thp quesHon recurs on the amendment oflFered by
the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb].

Mr. VEST. In order to perfect the amendment in my judgment, I move to strike
out in line 7 the word " equally," and to strike out "sums whatever" and insert
" debts, public and private, except where otherwise stipulated." I do not like the
expression "all sums whatever." We ought to specify the nature of the obliga-
tion. I 6up])0F!e that is the meaning.

Mr. GEORGE. Will the Senator allow me to ask him a question?

Mr. VEST. Certainly.

Mr. GEORGE. I wish to ask the Senator thia question, by his consent : Doe*
he propose by this amendment to allow contracts to be made payable in gold or
payable in silver, and if when po made payable in gold that they can not be raid
by a tender of silver, or if when made payable in silver they can not be paid by a
tender of gold ? Is that the view which the Senator intends to incorporate in.
the legislation of the United States?

Mr. VEST, If the Senator objects to the words " except where otherwise stipu-
lated," I will leave them rut and let it read " debtf, public and private."

Mr. KENNA.^ Will the Senator from Missouri state his amendment again?

Mr. VEST. The word "equally," in line 7, is utterly unnecessary, besides it
mars the structure of the sentence ; but that does not amount to so much. It will
mean the same thing to say "the said coins shall be legal tender." Then I pro-
pose to strike out sums whatever " and to insert " debts, public aud private, except
where otherwise stipulated ;" but I will strike out the words "except where other-
wise stipulated," and say " all debts, public and private." I do not like the expree-
■gton "sums whatever."

Mr. GEORGE. If the Senator strikes out " except where otherwise stipulated,"^
I am satisfied.

Mr. VEST. I will modify it by saying ''all debts, piblic and private."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Missouri proposes an amend-
ment to the ameniment, which will be stated.

The Cbief Clerk. In line 7 of the proposed amendment strike out " equally,"
and in line 8 strike out the words "sums whatever " and insert in lieu thereof the
words " debts, public and private ; " so as to make the clause read :

"And the said coin shall be legal tender for all debts, public and private."

The amendment, to the amendment was agreed to

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Tne question now is on- agreeing to the amend-
ment of the Senator from Kansa« [Mr. Plumb] as amended.

Mr. BLAIR. I move to add at the end of the proposed amendment :

'' And after the Ist day of January A. D. 1890, there shall be no legal tender in
the United States except gold and silver coin."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment to
the amendment.

The amendment to the amendment was rejected.

Vote on Free Coinage,

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question recurs on the amendment offered
by the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb], upon which the yeas and nays have;
been ordered.

Mr. MORRILL. Lot it be read.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment as amended will be read.

Bate,

Coke,

Berrv,

Colquitt,

Blair,

Daniel,

Blodgett,

Eustis,

Butler,

George,

Call,

Gibson,

Cameron,

Gorman,

Carlisle,

Harris,

Cockrell,

Hearst,

Aldrich,

CuUom,

Allen,

Dawes,

Allison,

Edmunds,

Casey,

Evarts,

Chandler,

Frje,

Payne,

Teller,

Plumb,

Turpie,

Power,

Vance,

Pugb,

Vest,

Ransom,

Voorhees,

Reagan,

Walthall,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Squire,

Stewart,

McPherson,

Spooner,

Morrill,

Stockbridge,

Pierce,

Washburn,

Sawyer,

Wilson of Md

The Chief Clerk, It is proposed to strike out section 1 of the bill and in lien
thereof to insert:

" That from and after the date of the passage of this act the unit of value in the
United States shall be the dollar, and the same may be coined of 4122 grains of
standard silver, or of 25.8 grains of standard gold, and the said coins shall be legal
tender for all debts, public and private.

" That hereafter any owner of silver or gold bullion may deposit the same in any
mint of the United States to be formed into standard dollars or bars for his benefit
and without charge, but it shall he lawful ro refute any deposit of less value than
$100, or anv bullion po base as to be unsuitable for the operations of the mint."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary will call the roll on agreeing to the
amendment of the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb] as amended.

The result was announced — yeas 43, nays 24, as follows:

YEAS— 43.
Ingalls,
Jones of Ark.
Jones of Nev.
Kenna,
Manderson,
Mitchell,
Moody,
Morgan,
Paddock,

NAYS— 24.
Gray,
Hale,
Hawley,
Hiscock,
Hoar, Sherman,

So the amendment was agreed to.

Upon the announcement of the result there were manifestations of
applause in the galleries.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Harl-is in the chair). The Chair admonishes
the galleries that neither demonstrations of approval nor disapproval are in order.

Mr. PLUMB. I move to add a new section as section 2, as follows :

" Sec. 2. That the provisions of section 3 of 'an act to authorize the coinage of
the standard silver dollar and to restore its legal-tender character,' which became
a law February 28, 1878, are hereby made applicable to the coinage in this act
provided for."

Mr. PLUMB. Section 3 of the act of the 28th of February, 1878, provides :

" That any holder of the coin authorized by this act may deposit the same with
the Treasurer or any assistant treasurer of the United States, in sums not lees than
$10, and receive therefor certificates of not less than $10 each, corresponding with
the denominations of the United States notes.' The coin deposited for or repre-
senting the certificates shall be retained in the Ireaeury for the payment of the
Bame on demand. Said certificates shall be receivable for customs, taxes, and all
public dues, and, when so received, may be reissued."

Mr. GEORGE. I shoLld like to ask the Senator from Kansas whether under
his amendment, if the bill is amended as he proposes, silver certificates of less
than $10 can be issued.

Mr. PLUMB. There is a provision of a subsequent act, in an appropriation
act about 1887 or 1888, under which certificates of one and two dollars denomina-
tion can be iseu<^d ad. libitum.

Mr. GEORGE. Would that provision be applicable to coinage under this pro-
posed act ?

Mr. PLUMB. Undoubtedlv.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment
of the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb].

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. REAGAN, I move to add to the bill, to come In as section 3, what I send
to the desk.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment proposed by the Senator from
Texas will be read.

The Chief Clerk. It is proposed to add a new section, as follows :

" Sec. 3. That the coin certificates issned under the provisions of this act shall
be of denominations of not less than one nor more than one hundred dollars,
and such certificates ehall be redeemable in coin of standard value. And the
Secretary of the Treasury shall cause to be coined from time to time so mu^h of
tb e bullion received under the provisions of this act as may be necessary to furnish
coin for the redempiif^n of such certificates. A sufficient sum to carry out the
provisions of this act is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury
not otherwise appropriated. The provision in section 1 of the act of February 28,
1878, entitled ' An act to authorize the coinage of the standard dollar and to re-
store its legal-tender charactf^r,' which requires the S^creta^-y of the Treasury to
purchase at tht market price thereof not less than $2,000,000 worth of silver bul-
lion per month, nor more than $4,000,000 worth per month of such bullion, is
hereby repealed."

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amendment
priposed hy ihr Senator from Texas [Mr. Reagan].

Mr. PLUMB. I move to strike out so much of the amendment as relates to the
coinage of bullion, contained from lines 4 to 8 inclusi'^e.

" And the Secretary of the Treasury shall cause to be coined from time to time
60 much of Vte ballion received under the provisions of this act as may be neces-
sary tofurnisW coin for the redemption of such certificates."

Mr. REAGAN. There is no objetttion to that. I accept the amendment.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas accepts the amendment
of the S -nator from Kansas, and so modifies his amendment. The question is oa
agreeing to the amendment of the Senator from Texas as modified.

Mr. EDMUND"'. I wish, without interfering at all with the fine symposium we
are having on a subject very interesting to the people of the United States, to say
(avoiding thereby, so far as I am concerned, any call of the yeas and nays) that I
am opposed to the bill as it now stands and every one of its amendments, in gen-
eral and in particular, and therefore that I am not to be called upon hereafter to
account for having allowed an ameadment to pass without calling for the yeas and
nays. I am willing to deliver over ro the Democratic party, whatever it may be
(which U a question I have not time here to discuss), the manag^-ment of the finan-
ces of this country for the time being, but I only sta'^e this in ord^r that I may not
trouble the Senate with demanding the yeas and nays upon the various ornamen-
tations tha^ are given to t>iis hoodlum that is set up.

Mr. PLUMB. Mr. President, the question as to what responsibility the Senator
from Vermont shall hold his people to, or they shall hold him to is of course of no
consequence except as between tho3« two parties; but when he says he is going to
deliver over to the Democratic party the control of the finances of this country oh
account of the vote j ist given for free coinnge of silver, I ask him what he is going
to do with the last Republican national platform ? Is he going to consent, or agree,
or otherwise provide that the platform of the Republican party adopted at Chicago
in 1888 shall be the Decnocratic platform, and if he i-<, is he g nng to clnm for the
Republican party the platform adopted in St. Louis in 1888 upon which Mr. Cleve-
land was nominated?

Names are sometimes things. I prefer to believe, Mr. President, that in this
ebullition the Senator from Vermont does not represent either himself or the Re-
publican party. He will s )me day think better of thig proposition to meet the
reasonable and just demands of the people of the Unifed States in regard to cur-
rency supply and the material of which it is to be composed ; and while I feel grati-
fied at his course in declining to put any obstruction in the way of the passage of
the bill now before the Senate, I am not willing that what he says shall go ta the
country as representing the Republican party, although, of course, if the questio»
were between him and me as to who was en it!ed to speak authoritatively as to the
Republican party, it would be decided in his favor.

Mr. EDMUNDS- Mr. President, I stand by the Republican platform to which
the Sena'.or from Kansas has alluded, fully and in all its implications; but oar

friends the Democrats on the other side, and their deluded followers and coadju-
tors, have poisoned that Republican platform and transformed it into a platform
that no Democratic convention ever dared to make, and that no Democratic admin-
istration, that no Democratic House of Representatives ever dared to propose to do,
because they knew that swifcly — it may take some years to do so — the people of
the United States would find out that they had been deluded and misled, as people
before have been in all countries, by getting up a cry of people who have something
to sell and people who have something to pay, to expend, and when the expansion
comes and the break comes, as it certainly will and always has, then it is not the
poor and the sorrowful that we are talking about or the debtors.who profit by it, but
it is the very persona that these gentlemen are now howling against so strongly who
make all the money out of it. That is what all human experience has shown.

Therefore, Mr. President, standing by everything that the Republican platform
says, I declare that this has turned it into a poison and a wrong, and it is not what
it purports to mean at all ; and let those profit by it who make their profit by and
by, and explain themselves.

Mr. VEST. Mr. President, the Senator from Vermont makes an assertion which
is directly contradicted by the record and is historically untrue. He states that
no Democratic House has ever passed a free-coinage bill. The House of Repre-
sentatives in 1877, with a large Democratic majority, did pass a free-coinage act,
pure and simple, and it came to the Senate and was mutilated here, with the free-
coinage feature taken out of it by the Republican party, and that is the record.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Oh, yes, Mr. President, I had forgotten that there was a
Democratic party in 1878 and 1879 [laughter] ; and I will not believe there was —

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair must remind the Senator from Ver-
mont that under the rule no one is at liberty to speak oftener than once nor more
than five minutes upon any pending question.

Mr. EDMUNDS. ThenI move to postpone the bill indefinitely, and I will see
what I can do then.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That motion is in order.

Mr. BUTLER. I ask that the Senator from Vermont may have unanimous
consent to proceed.

Mr. EDMUNDS. I do not ask any unanimous consent. I am not yet a servant
of the party on the other side.

Mr. BUTLER. I am sorry he is not, Mr. President.

Mr. EDMUNDS. The Democratic party as it is called, being the House of
Representatives, or a majority of it, in 1878 and 1879, did pass a contrivance of
that kind, just as they are trying to pass it now, in order to overthrow by appeals
to the worst instincts and the unhappiest solicitudes of the United States some-
thing that might bring them into power. They accomplished it, and Mr. Cleve-
land was elected ; and having been elected by their votes, Mr. Cleveland was wise
enough and brave enough to tell his Democratic supporters that that sort of delu-
sion could not be carried into practice ; and the Democratic party was wise enough
for a wonder — wise enough for a wonder — to be absolutely silent for four years
upon that topic. I was going to make a very improper quotation from Shake-
speare, but I will not make it. No patriot — I will change Shakespeare a little — no
patriot opened his mouth to bark at the administration of President Cleveland
because he persistently and steadily declined, under whatever influence, and I
honor him for it. In whatever way I may differ from him as to his policy and
career, he was certainly a patriot in that respect. He could not be betrayed nor
seduced into destroying the prosperity of the people of the United States by ad-
vising any such measure as that which we have now or as is suggested by our
Democratic associates, and no man in either House — there may have been an excep-
tion, but I never heard of it — in the whole four years — and think of it, Mr. Presi-
dent, four years of Democratic silence [laughter] — opened his lips to relieve a
suffering people from a want of the coinage of the silver dollar, when everybody
who had anything to pay could borrow money, if he had anything to present for
borrowing it, of his neighbor or his bank or anywhere else, for a less cost of
interest than he ever could before, and when all the time in those four years the
Treasury was bulging (if I may use a nautical expression) with the silver coinage
that was deposited in its vaults, and where a large surplus of it still is.

I say, then, with great respect to my friend from Kansas and to everybody else,
that this is the new performance, renewed from 1878 and 1879 lo 1890, of the

Democratic party, when it has no responsibility (and I agree it ought never to have
any), again proposing to entangle the Republican party, who must look a little
farther than the cry of to-day, into a measure of this kind. So be it. I deliver
it over to the Democratic party.

Mr. REA.GAN. Mr. President, I simply desire to say that the Senator from
Vermont [Mr. Edmunds] is a little mistaken when he says that no member of
either House opened hia mouth against the policy of the President during the last
Administration. It perhaps did not attract the attention of the Senator that one
hundred Representatives, members of the House, signed a paper and addressed
it to the President, after the newspapers gave it out that he was opposed to
free coinage or desired the repeal of the law authorizing the limited coinage of
silver, asking him to suspend his judgment upon that subject until he could come
to Washington and consult with the representatives of the people who elected
him President President Cleveland was hardly expected to make an answer to
that, but he did make a pretty vigorous answer to it, and that answer contained
in substance the statement that the coinage of silver had already trenched so far
upon the supply of gold in the country as to endanger our capacity to redeem
legal-tender notes.

Mr. EDMUNDS. What year was that?

Mr. REAGAN. That was the year he was elected President, and before the first
Congress met after he was elected. A response was made to that. I had the
honor to make that response and to inquire who informed the President that the
coinage of silver had driven gold out of the country, and to show from the Treasury
reports a steady accumulation of the surplus of gold from the passage of the act
of 1878 to that time. I also inquired who informed the President that the legal-
tender notes were refused to be redeemed in gold. The law did not say so. I
inquired also who informed him that they were to be redeemed at all, for the law
of 1878 required that when paid into the Treasury they should be reissued and
kept in circulation.

The Senator from Vermont is usually thoroughly informed, but evidently this
morning he is somewhat out of humor, and it is not surprising that young and
inexperienced men under defeat should get out of humor ; and he may not recol-
lect as well as he would under other circumstances.

Sir, there were Democrats brave enough to tell the President, who was willing
to sacrifice the public interest, that they would not submit to it; just as to-day
there are Republicans brave enough to tell the Administration that they can not
be led to sacrifice the interest of this country, and that the interests of the people
must be subserved and not the interests of a class which seeks to get dear money
and cheap labor and cheap property, to oppress the masses for the benefit of the
few.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Mr. President, I did not happen to be invited to sign the
private and confidential paper that the hundred gentlemen of tbe House of Repre-
sentatives addressed to Mr. Cleveland, but I happen to know this, that whatever
may have been the private appeals and objurgations by deluded men to the Presi-
dent of the United States, at that time Mr. Cleveland, he evidently denied their
application and nothing came of it except a rejoinder that my friend fron Texas
says he or somebody else made. After that, the Democratic party at St. Louis —
and there is a book (I was able to extract it like a brand from the burning from
the hands of my friend from Louisiana [Mr. Eustis] yesterday) containing the
Democratic declaration of principles — it is rather a joke to put it that way, but
tiiat is the way it is in the book, printed so — in which they extol Mr. Cleveland's
administraMon of the public affairs from beginning to end. They shied on the
silver question because it was party tactics, as they thought, to do so. They had
not beliefs enough that they were willing to express to state them, knowing what
their candidate's opinion was, and they would rather live under a conservative
administration of Mr. Cleveland and get the offices, if he got in, than to make a
frank and explicit declaration of what mv friend from Texas says was the opinion ,
of ooe hundred members of the House of Representatives,

After all this, when that solemn and respectable body met at St. Louis in June,
eighteen hundred and whatever it was — 1888, 1 suppose — I repeat that they de-
clared ia the most specific language that a Democratic committee on resolutions
was capable of employing (and I assume it must be complete) that the whole ad-
ministration of Mr. Cleveland had rebounded to the benefit and honor of the

country. It included, I take It, the wicked measures that he repressed as much
as the good measures that he favored ; namely, free trade, or properly foreign
trade, to the disadvantage of every laborer in the United States. That ia where
you were.

Now, your opportunity has come again when you have no responsibilitiea and
only appeal to the cry of those who are desirous to pay their debts for less than
they coui.racted to pay them, and the desire of those who have mines of silver to
made products to sell to again make a perfectly safe declaration that you are for
everything and f>>r everybody, but when you have Eelected your man and put him
in place I am bound to pay the homage of my respectful admiration to all of you
that you would know enough not to pretend any such nonsense while he was in
the chair.

Mr. VEST. Mr. President, the Senator from Vermont exhibits his usual inge-
nuity, ac'.;ompanied by his usual unfairness in shirking the issue which he made
himself and from which he is forced to retreat by the record. He asserted here
that no Democratic House of Representatives had ever dared to pass a free-coinage
bill. I assert that the record shows that the House of Representatives, in the
Forty -fourth and Forty- fifth Congresses, both of them overwhelmingly Democratic,
did pass a free- coinage bill and sent it to the Senate.

The Senator now seeks to evade his misstatement of facts by an appeal to the
pax'tisau passions of his own party. In one breath he alludes to his deluded asso-
ciates upon that side of the Chamber, and then turns with Parisian elegance to
compliment his respected friend from Kansas, who is one of them.

But the Senator from Vermont makes another misstatement from the record.
He says that no Democrat was found to protest openly against Mr. Cleveland's
views in regard to silver. I assert that within ten days after the first Congress
met after Cleveland had announced those views, one of the most distinguished
Democratic Senators in this body, our late associate, James B. Beck, of Kentucky^
in a speech which attracted the attention of the whole country and electrified the
West, attacked those opinions and upon this floor held the undivided attention of
bis brother Senators whilst he gave his reasons for differing with the Democratic
President; and now the Senator from Vermont, with hia usual candor, with his
usual sincerity, compliments President Cleveland.

Sir, all I can say in that a great many hard things and harsh things have been
said of that distinguished Democrat, but the encomium of the Senator from Ver-
mont i^ the most terrible assault that ever was mgde upon him. [Laughter.]

Mr. EDMUNDS. You will nominate him again, all the same. [Laughter.]

Mr. REAGAN. Mr. President, I ask leave to modify my amendment by strik-
ing out the words "coin certificates," and inserting in place of them " the certifi-
cates provided for in the first section of this act."

Mr. PLUMB. Mr. President, my service in this body has been long enough to
enable me to recall that the Senator from Vermont [Mr. Edmunds] uttered about
the same jeremiad in 1878 that he has just uttered in regard to the provision
which has been adopted by a decided majority of the Senate. If I could have him
sworn on his voir dire, as we say about a juryman, I would be willing to leave it to
him whether a single one of the dismal prophecies made about the effects to fol-
low the passage of the bill remonetizing silver in 1878 had been realized.

I am aware that in very large measure the criticism upon the Republicanism of
any one by the Senator from Vermont carries very great weight. The Senator
from Colorado [Mr, Teller] says " in Vermont." No, Mr. President, ia the United
States, and I would prefer always to resolve doubts by accepting his standard of
Republicanism rather than my own ; but when I have no doubt I must of necessity
^jffer with him and accept his reproaches. At the present moment I feel com-
fortable about the company in which I find myself, embracing so large a number
of Republicans whose faith is as well attested by works as that of the Senator
tsom Vermont ; and all the more because in 1878 I voted to carry the Bland bill over
the vetp of a Republican President, and the Senator from Vermont voted to sustain
that veto ; all the more because I see that what he then said was Republicanisnj
proveH not to be so; all the more because the people whom I have ttie honor to
irepresent in part upon this floor put the stamp of their approval upon my Repub-
licanism as voiced in the votes which I gave at that time against the Senator from
Vermont and men opinionated like him, who then, as now, talked with a sneer
about the people of the West wanting to create cheaper money with which to pay

100

their debts, and accused them of repudiation. The RepubHcanism of Kansas is as
conspicuous, as well foundeii, and as enlightened as that of Vermont.

Mr. President, I might say something disagreeable about the people who want
the policy of the Government so fashioned that what they contracted for shall be
largely increased in value before pay day comes. He has no word of denuaciatioa
for the people who have so managed the affairs of the Government, or have had
them so managed by those who represent them in Congress, as to add 30 per cent,
to the value of the metal in which the debts due them are to be paid, to the great
burden of those who have to pay them.

But this is not a time for recriminations. I thank Heaven that there is room
enough in the Republican party for wide differences of opinion upon great eco-
nomic questions. No member, however eminent, can speak with absolute author-
ity, and no one is necessary to the party, nor can it be held as the exponent of
any locality or class. Whether he or I is on the ri^rht track now, so far as the tenets
of the Republican party as to silver are concerned, I am willing to take the last na-
tional platform as meaning what the people I represent uaderstood it to mean on
that question. If the people of Vermont understood it differently t^at is their
lookout. We shall all be wiser some of these days, and I do not doubt that the
Senator from Vermont will have abundant and early occasion to recant what he
has just said about the direful effects to follow the free coinage of silver.

Mr. President, there never has been an experience of human kind which justifies
what the Senator from Vermont has said. There never was but one demonetiza-
tion of silver in this country and that was in 1873. There n-^ ver has been any dis-
turbance growing out of the relations between the two metals except what grew
out of that act. There is not a line or a syllable of human exptirience which can in-
dicate to any unbiased person that this measure which the Senate has set its fav-
orable seal upon and which it is about to perfect and pass can be otherwise than
helpful in the highest and best sense to the great majority of the American peo-
ple.

Mr. Reagan's amendment having been modified to read as follows:

"Sec. 3. That the certificates provided for in the second sectioa of this act shall
be of denominations of not less than one nor more than one hundred dollars, and
such certificates shall be redeemable in coin of standard value. A suflicient sum
to carry out the provisions of this act is hereby appropriat-^d out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. The provision in section 1 of the act of
February 28, 1878, entitled ' An act to authorize the coinage of the standard dol-
lar and to restore its legal-tender character,' which requires the Secretary of the
Treasury to purchase, at the market price thereof, not less than $2,000,000 worth of
silver bullion per month nor more than $4,000,000 worth per month of such bul-
lion, is hereby repealed."

It was adopted without a yea and nay vote.

Mr. SHERMAN. Now I ask that quiet be restored long enough to have this bill
amended as it is, read carefally by the Secretary, so that we may understand it.

Mr. TELLER. Before that is done I wish to move an amend rnent:

"That the certificates provided for in this act shall be receivable for all taxes and
dues to the United States of every description, and shall be a lawful tender for the
payment of all debts, public and private."

I offer that as an additional section.

Then followed a discussion on legal tender, participated in by
Messrs. Blair, Gray, Teller, Spooner, and Morgan.

Mr. EUSTIS. I offer the following amendment to the amendment proposed bj
the Senator from Colorado: After the words "that the certificates provided for in
this act," I move to insert "and all silver certificates already issued ;" so that ther«
will be no discrimination between silver certificates.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment of the Sena-
tor from Colorado [Mr. Teller] as modified.

Mr. SHERMAN. I call for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered ; and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

101

The result was announced — yeas 34, nays 22 ; as follows

YEAS— 34.

yien,

Colquitt,

Jones of Ark.

Plumb,

Teller,

Bate,

Daniel,

Jones of Nev.

Pugh,

Turpie,

3erry,

Dolph,

Kenna,

Ransom,

Vest,

3utler,

Eustis,

Mitchell,

Reagan,

Voorhees,

Cameron,

George,

Moody,

Sanders,

"Walthall,

Dockrell,

Hearst,

Morgan,

Squire,

Wolcott.

IJoke,

Ingalls,

Paddock,

NAYS-

_oo

Stewart,

Udrich,

Chandler,

Gibson,

Hoar,

Stockbi idge,

\.lli8on,

Dawes,

Gorman,

McPherson,

Washburn.

Blair,

Edmunde,

Hale,

Payne,

Bloduett,

Evarts,

Harris,

Sawyer,

Carlisle,

Frj'e,

Hiscock,

Spooner,

So the amendment was agreed to.

Mr. PLUMB. I move to insert as a new section,5to come in iromediately after
,be section just adopted :

" Sec. 5. The owners of bullion deposited for coinage shall have the option to
■eceive coin or Us equivalent in the certificates provided for in this act, and such
jullion shall be subsequently coined." ^..

That is to cover the contingency that the Treasury Department may not at the
dme of the presentation be in condition to coin it on account of lack of proper fa-
lilities. Bullion therefore may be taken in and the coinage occur at a subsequent
period, at the convenience of the officers of the Mint and of the Secretary of the
treasury.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on agreeing to the amendment pro-
ijosed by the Senator from Kansas [Mr. Plumb].

The amendment was agreed to.

Mr. ALDRICH. I ask that the bill as it now stands may be read for the infor-
mation of the Senate.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill as it now stands amended will be reported.

The Chief Clerk read as follows :

"That from and after the date and passage of this act the unit of value in the
Qnited States shall be the dollar, and the same may be coined of 412^ grains of
standard silver, or of 25.8 grains of standaid gold; and the said coins shall be
legal tender for all debts, public and private. That hereafter any owner of silver
or gold bullion may deposit the same at any mint of the United States to be
formed into standard dollars or bars for his benefit and without charge; but it
shall be lawful to refuse any deposit of less value than $100, or atiy bullion so base
as to be unsuitable for the operations of the mint.

" Sec. 2. That the provision of section 3 of ' An act to authorize the coinasre of
khe standard silver dollar and to restore its legal tender character,' which became
a law February 28, 1878, is hereby made applicable to the coinage in this act pro-
vided for.

" Sec. 3. That the certificates provided for in the second section of this act shall
be of denominations of not less than one nor more than one hundred dollarp, and
8uch certificates shall be redeemable in coin of standard value. A sufficient sum
to carry out the provisions of this act is hereby appropriated out of any money in
the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. The provision in section 1 of the act of
February 28, 1878, entitled 'An act to authorize the coinage of the standard dollar
and to restore its legal-tender character,' which requires the Secretary of the
Treasury to purchase, at the market price thereof, not less than $2,000,000 worth of
silver bullion per month nor more than $4,000,000 worth per month of such bullion,
is hereby repealed.

" Sec. 4. That the certificates provided for in this act and all silver and gold cer-
tificates already issued shall be receivable for all taxes and dues to the United
States of every description and shall be a legal tender for the payment of all debts,
public and private.

102

" Sec. 5. The owners of bullion deposited for coinage shall have the option to
receive coin or its equivalent in the certificates provided for in this act, and such
bullion shall be subsequently coined.

" Sec. 6. That upon the passage of this act the balances standing with the Treasurear
of the United States to the respective credits of national banks for deposits made
to redeem the circulating notes of such banks, and all deposits thereafter received
for like purpose, shall be covered into the Treasury as a miscellaneous receipt, and
the Treasurer of the United States shall redeem from the general cash in the
Treasury the circulating notes of said banks which may come into his possession
subject to redemption ; and upon the certificate of the Comptroller of the Current^
that such notes have been received by him and that they have been destroyed
and that no new notes will be issued in their place, reimbursement of their amoant
shall be made to the Treasurer, under such regulations as the Secretary of the
Treasury may prescribe, from an appropriation hereby created, to be known as
' National-bank notes : Redemption account,' but the provisions of this act shall not
apply to the deposits received under section 3 of the act of June 20, 1874, requir-
ing every National bank to keep in lawful money with the Treasurer of the United
States a sum equal to 5 per centum of its circulation, to be held and used for the
redemption of its circulating notes ; and the balance remaining of the deposits so
covered shall, at the close of each month, be reported on the monthly public-debt
statement as debt of the United States bearing no interest."

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there be no further amendment as in Committee
of the Whole the bill will be reported to the Senate.

The bill was reported to the Senate as amended.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on concurring in the amendments
made as in Committee of the Whole.

Mr. EDMUNDS. Let us have the yeas and nays on that.

The yeas and nays were ordered ; and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

The result was announced — yeas 41, nays 26 ; as follows :

YEAS— 41.

Bate,

Daniel,

Kenna,

Power,

Vance,

Berry,

Eustis,

Manderson,

Pugh,

Vest,

Blodgett,

George,

Mitchell,

Ransom,

Voorhees,

Butler,

Gorman,

Moody,

Reagan,

Walthall,

Call,

Harris,

Morgan,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Cameron,

Hearst,

Paddock,

Squire,

Cockrell,

Ingalls,

Pasco,

Stewart,

Coke,

Jones of Ark.

Payne,

Teller,

Colquitt,

Jones of Nev.

Plumb,
NAYS— 26.

Turpie,

Aid rich.

Cullom,

Hale,

Pierce,

Washburn,

Allen,

Dawes,

Hawley,

Piatt,

Wilson of Md.

Allison,

Edmunds,

Hiscock,

Sawyer,

Blair,

Evarts,

Hoar,

Sherman,

Casey,

Frye,

McPherson,

Spooner,

Chandler,

Gray,

Morrill,

Stockbridgf,

So the amendments made in Committee of the Whole were con-
curred in.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The bill is still before the Senate and open to amend-
ment.

;Mr. CHANDLER. I move to amend the bill by adding a new section, as follows :

"No gold or silver bullion shall be received by the Treasury Department under
this act except such as shall be shown to be the product of mines within the United
States."

Mr. TELLER. I move to lay that amendment on the table.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is on the motion of the Senator from
Colorado to lay the amendment offered by the Senator from New Hampshire on
the table.

Mr. CHANDLER. On that motion I call for the yeas and nays.

103

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to
call the roll.

The roll-call havingbeen concluded, the result was announced — yeai
42, nays 19; as follows :

YEAS— 42.

Allen,

Colquitt,

Ingalls,

Plumb,

Turpie,

Bate,

CuUom,

Jones of Ark.

Power,

Vance,

Berry,

Daniel,

Jones of Nev.

PDgh,

Vest,

Blodgett,

Eustis,

Kenna,

Ransom,

Voorhees,

Butler,

George,

Mitchell,

Reagan,

Walthall,

Call,

Gorman,

Moody,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Cameron,

Gray,

Morgan,

Squire,

Cockrell,

Harris,

Pasco,

Stewart,

Coke,

Hearst,

Payne,

NAYS— 19.

Teller,

Aldrich,

Dawes,

Hale,

Paddock,

Spooner,

Blair,

Edmunds,

Hiscock,

Pierce,

Stock bridge,

Casey,

Evarts,

Hoar,

Piatt,

Washburn.

Chandler,

Frye,

Morrill,

Sawyer, ,

So the amendment was laid on the table.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. If there be no further amendment proposed, the
question is. Shall the amendments be engrossed and the bill be read a third time?

The amendments were ordered to be engrossed and the bill to be read a third
time.

The bill was read the third time.

Vote on the Final Passage op the Bill.

Mr. EDMUNDS. On the passage of the bill I demand the yeas and nays.

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The question is. Shall the bill pass on which the yeas
and nays are demanded ?

The yeas and nays were ordered, and the Secretary proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. ALLISON. I desire to say that my colleague [Mr. Wilson], being absent on
account of illness, is paired on this question with the Senator from California [Mr.
Stanford]. If my colleague were present, he would vote in the negative.

The result was announced — yeas 42, nays 25 ; as follows :

YEAS— 42.

Bate,

Daniel,

Kenna,

Plumb,

Turpie,

Berry,

Eustis,

Manderson,

Power,

Vance,

Blodgett,

George,

Mitchell,

Pugh,

Vest,

Butler,

Gorman,

Moody,

Ransom,

Voorhees,

Call,

Harris,

Morgan,

Reagan,

Walthall,

Cameron,

Hearst,

Paddock,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Cockrell,

Ingalls,

PdSCO,

Squire,

Coke,

Jones of Ark,

Payne,

St'^wart,

Colquitt,

Jones of Nev.,

Pierce,
NAYS— 25.

Teller,

Aldrich,

Chandler,

Frye,

Hoar,

Sherman,

Allen,

CuUom,

Gray,

McPherson.

Spooner,

Allison,

Dawes,

Hale,

Morrill,

Stockbridge, '

Blair,

Edmunds,

Haw ley.

Piatt,

Washburn.

Casey,

Evarts,

Hiscock,

Sawyer,

Wilson of Md.

So the bill was passed.

104

Mr. PLUMB. I move to amend the title so as to read : "A bill to provide for the
free coinage of gold and silver bullion, and for other purposes."

The VICE-PRESIDENT. The amendment to the title will be considered as
agreed to, if there be no objection. The Chair hears none.

The bill as it passed the Senate was as perfect a free coinage
measure as could be desired. The first section restored the unit to
both metals, as in the act of 1792, made the coinage of both metals
free, and made silver as well as gold full legal tender for all purposes.

It also made all certificates issued on either gold or silver, legal
tender for all debts, public and private.

This bill will stand as a monument of the wisdom of the Senate,
and is evidence that on this great question the Senate was in closer
touch with the people than the House, and if the bill, as it passed
the Senate, had become a law it would have settled forever the silver
question.

From an analysis of the foregoing votes it will be seen that the
only Senator west of the Missouri River who voted against free
eoinage was Mr. Allen, of Washington. Mr. Dolph, of Oregon,
however, spoke against silver, and was paired against the bill, and
did not vote at all.

Of the Iowa Senators Mr. Wilson stood paired against free coin-
age, and Mr. Allison voted the same way.

Between the Mississippi and the Ohio Rivers, the Senators frora
Illinois, Wisconsin, Michigan, and Mr. Sherman, of Ohio, voted
against the bill, or were paired against it. Mr, Payne, of Ohio,
voted for the bill.

Of the Eastern Senators, only Mr. Cameron, of Pennsylvania, Re-
publican ; and Mr. Gorman, of Maryland, and Mr. Blodgett, of New-
Jersey, Democrats, voted for the bill.

Thus the bill went back to the House with the subsitution of free
coinage in lieu of the purchase of four and a half millions worth of
silver a month, with bullion redemption.

The Debate in the Senate.

The debate in the Senate on the silver question during the session
just closed will undoubtedly be accepted as the ablest that has ever
taken place on the money question in the American Congress.
And, so far as pertains to the discussion of monetary principles, it is
doubtful if a parallel can be found in the debates in any parliamen-
tary body.

The debate with which it would naturally be compared is the great
debate in the British Parliament preceding the act of 1844, which

105

has become memorable in the history of monetary legislation. The
literature that preceded, and which sprung from this debate, is, per-
haps, the richest extant relating to the subject of money. This
debate settled forever, for English-speaking people, the principle that
the regulation of money belongs to the State and can not safely be
left to the control of private interests.

To appreciate the full merits of the debate in the Senate it is neces-
sary to follow it carefully through. Many of the speeches were
masterly productions. All phases of the subject were discussed and
from all points of view.

It would be impossible, by short extracts, to give anything like a
fair exposition of the debate, and, therefore, that will not be at-
tempted.

A few extracts, however, bearing directly on the bill under consid-
eration are here given.

In the speech of Senator Jones, of Nevada, every phase of the
money question is fully and ably discussed. The speech as a whole
will take a foremost place in monetary literature, and be read by the
student of economic science as well for the clearness with which
it discusses monetary principles as for the fullness of the information
it contains.

Only a few extracts, giving a few leading principles, however, can

be given here :

Cause op a Fall of Prices.

When a fall of prices is found operating, not on one article or class of articles
alone, but on the products of all industries ; when found to be not confined to any
one climate, country, or race of people, but to diffuse itself over the civilized world ;
when it is found not to be a characteristic of any one year, but to go on progress-
ively for a series of years, it becomes manifest that it does not and can not arise
from local, temporary or subordinate causes, but mitet have its genesis and devel-
opment in some principle of universal application.

Stable Monky.

With an advancing civilization, in which a large volume of business is conducted
©n a basis of credit extending over long periods, it is of the uttermost importance
that money, which is the measure of all equities, should be kept unchanging in
value through time.

An Increasing Money Unit.

It is only within a comparatively recent period that an increasing value in the
money unit could produce such widespread disturbance of industry as it produces
to-day. In the rude periods of society commerce was by barter ; and even for
thousands of years after the introdnction of money, credit, where known at all, was
extremely limited. Under such circumstances changes in the volume and in the
value of money, while operating to the disadvantage of society as a whole, could
not instantly or seriously affect any one individual.

It is my firm conviction that the inexpressible miseries inflicted upon mankind
by war, pestilence, and famine have been less cruel, unpitying, and unrelenting
than the persistent and remorseless exactions which this inexorable enemy has
made upon society.

106

Contrary to all principles of progress and of natural justice, the man who keeps
his money idle, and deprives society of its use, is rewarded by an unearned incre-
ment, while he who puts his money into active business where industry and labor
may profit by it, is punished by unmerited loss.

The Creditoes' Demand for the " Best Money."

The creditors tell us that all they want is " good money." They and their friends
glibly insist that all obligations must be paid in " the best money." This is the
delicate and plausible euphemism resorted to in order to gloss over and, if possible,
hide from the world the odious and repulsive fact that what the creditors always
want is the dearest money — the money that costs the people the most sweat and
toil to obtain, and which, as time passes, grows dearer and dearer.

A distinguished official of the Government, who was before a committee of this
body the other day, insisted that the proposed Treasury notes should be redeemed
in the " best money." I asked him what was the ''best money." " Why," he said.
" the money that is worth the most." Now, it strikes me, Mr. President, that if
you have borrowed a aoUar and, through a badly regulated money-system, are
made to pay a dollar worth 25 per cent, more than the dollar you borrowed, you
are not paying the best money, but the worst money ; not an honest dollar, but a
swindling and dishonest dollar.

According to all fair canons of construction the best money should be and is a
money of unchanging value, a money that exacts from the debtor the same amount
of sacrifice that he bargained for, and which is all that the creditor is equitably
entitled to receive.

According to the admissions of the royal commission of England, the gold dol-
lar of to-day is to the producers of this country, measured by their products, al-
ready at a premium of between 30 and 40 per cent., over the gold dollar of 1873.

The Quantitative Theory of Money — The Value of Each Dollar Depends on
THE Number of Dollars Out.

Thus by the universal competition to get it the value of the dollar is made to
depend upon the number of dollars that are out. This is a principle that lies
at the very foundation of the science of money. The law, stated broadly, is that
the value of each unit of money in any country at any given time depends on the
whole number of units in circulation in that country. The larger the number of
units out, population remaining the same, the less must be the value of each unit;
the smaller the number of units out, population remaining the same, the greater
the value of each.

Creditors and Debtors — A Comparison of Motives.

All movements for the increase of the monetary circulation are ascribed by the
money-lenders and creditor diasses to the unworthy desire on the part of the
debtors to escape their just obligations. But if motives are to be brought in ques-
tion, the rule should work both ways. No note is taken of the motive of the
creditor classes in securing a contraction of the circulation. Whatever the appar-
ent purpose of contraction, and however specious the arguments advanced in its
justification, the real object has always been to increase the purchasing power of
money. In all countries, and throughout all time, it is the cupidity of the creditor
classes and annuitants, and their desire to increase the value of the money unit
that has brought about a shrinkage in the money volume. Unlike the great
masses of the people, who were ignorant of the effects to be naturally expected
from such a shrinkage, the annuitants and moneyed men very well understood
that the value of every pound or dollar depended on the number of pounds or
dollars that were in circulation ; the larger the total number out, the smaller the
purchasing power of each ; the smaller the total number out, the greater the pur-
chasing power of each.

Who Are the Borrowers.

In all discussions of the subject the creditors attempt to brush aside the equities
involved by sneering at the debtors. But Mr. President, debt is the distinguish-
ing characteristic of modern society. It is through debt that the marvelous de-
velopments of nineteenth century civilization have been eff'ected. Who are the
debtors in this country ? Who are the borrowers of money? The men of en-

107

terprise, of energy, of skill, the men of industry, of foresight, of calculation, of
daring. In the ranks of the debtors will be found a large preponderance of the
constructive energy of every country. The debtors are the upbuilders of the na-
tional wealth and prosperity ; they are the men of initiative, the men who con-
ceive plans and set on foot enterprises. They are those who, by borrowing money,
enrich the community. They are the dynamic force among the people. They are
the busy, restless, moving throng whom you find in all walks of lite in this country
— the active, the vigorous, the strong, the undaunted.

Silver Has Not Fallen in Value.

It is a significant fact that every silver dollar that has been coined under that act
is at a parity with gold, and will to-day buy as much of all ihe objects of human
desire as will the gold dollar. Nay, more, silver bullion — disparaged and discredited
as it is by being shorn of the money function and denied access to the mints, in-
stead of decreasing in purchasing power has maintained so steady a relation to
eommodities that 412.T grains of uncoined silver will exchange for as much to-day
as would the coined dollar, whether of silver or gold, in 1873, when the full money
function attached equally to both metals. If this be true — and I shall presently
demonstrate it beyond refutation — what an utter perversion of terms it is to say
that silver has fallen in value?

Message from England.

I will read a cable dispatch recently addressed to me by Mr. Henry H. Gibbs,
formerly governor of the Bank of England, and now president of the Bimetallfc
League of Great Britain :

" London, May 6. — The friends of silver deeply regret the death of Senator Beck,
whose services in the cause of monetary reform are mo9t warmly appreciated on
this side of the Atlantic. The bimetallist party of the United Kingdom, now in-
cluding over one hundred members of the House of Commons, attach the greatest
value to the debate about to commence in your illustrious chamber. We fully
recognize not only that the support afforded to silver by your legislation during
the last twelve years has helped to protect the industrial world from an acute
monetary crisis, tut also that the debates in Congress have served more than all
else to educate our people to recognition of the importaLt issues involved. We
believe also that the increase and coinage of silver contemplated by Congress will
restore, wholly or considerably, your coinage rates, and will thus make interna-
tional settlement of this complex question comparatively easy. We anticipate
further, and with much confidence, that the advance in the price of silver whick
must follow your action will stimulate both the export and the other trades of your
•ountry, and, while tending to the prosperity of your agricultural classes, will also
assist the manufacturing industries of the United Kingdom and the whole body of
our wage earners."

To fully appreciate this speech it must be read as a whole.
Senator Teller, in an able speech, replying to Mr. Sherman, said :

Every Senator who has spoken against free coinage during this debate has as-
sumed that all advocates of free coinage are expansionists to begin with; that
they are in favor of an undue expansion of the circulating medium of this coun-
try. It has been assumed, in the second place, that we were for the repudiation
of the public debt and that we were for putting private debtors in a condition to
^scale down their debts. I deny this. I deny that the men who to-day stand in
the front rank as defenders of silver as money, not only in this country, but all over
the world, are tainted in that way. And here I may say that in every country,
among civilized men, some of the brightest and ablest men of to-day in public
and private life are the advocates of the unlimited use of silver on equal terms
with gold.

Great Britain has a hundred members of Parliament, and she has a number of
directors of her great banks, and a number of the very highest in learning and in
ability of her public teachers who are in favor of the use of the double standard.
If you go to the continent of Europe you will find the great banks of diflerent
continental countries contain more or less of people who insist that the free use
of silver is indispensable to commercial prosperity, to commercial success, and to

108

human progress and human happiness. No more illustrious examples can be
found anywhere than can be found on the Continent ; men like Professor Lave^eye,
of the Liege University, who has a world-wide reputation as a political economist ;
Mr. Pearson, who presides over the Bank of The Netherlands, and the countless
number of men in public positions and in private places who have given their besfc
thoughts and attention to this subject, and are neither repudiationists nor inflation-
ists.

* ******

The Senator from Vermont [Mr. Morrill] assumed — and I venture to refer to
it because he assumed it in relation to myself— that I was anxious to get on a silver
basis. I have denied that I was in favor of a silver basis from my seat in the
Senate; I have denied it on the public rostrum and through the press, and there
is no excuse for the Senator from Vermont or anybody else charging that either
I or very many others who associate with me in their views on this subject are in
favor of a silver basis. I have said, and I repeat, that if we can have but one
money metal the interest of this country and the interest of the world demand
that it shall be silver. On that question I am borne out, as I say, by very many-
men in this country and abroad.

It has been demonstrated beyond the possibility of a doubt that there is not gold
enough in the world and there is not being produced enough to carry on the busi-
ness of the world upon gold alone.

Mr. Teller quotes from Mr. Sherman as follows :

" The gold standard has been the recognized policy of all the great political par-
ties that have longest controlled the Government of the United States. The Fed-
eral party in the beginning sought to secure it by ascertaining the precise relative
market value of the two metals and coining both as money, but erroneously fixed
the ratio at 15 to 1.

" GeneralJackson and Benton and their associates in 1834, with the avowed pur-
pose to restore gold, or " Benton mint drops," as they were called, to circulation,
changed the ratio to 16 to 1, but this banished all silver coin. In the Administra-
tion of President Pierce in 1853 the present system was adopted, by which gold be-
came the unit of value and the coinage of silver was made subsidiary, but was
always maintained in purchasing power the equal of gold, dollar for dollar."

To this, Mr. Teller replied :

Mr. President, I challenge that statement. I assert that it is untrue, whether it
comes from an ex-Secretary of the Treasury or whether it comes from any body
else. There never was an hour previous to 1873 when the gold dollar was the unit of
value in this country. The silver dollar was the unit of value clear up to the pas-
sage of the act of 1873.

Not only that —

But the minor coins, the half-dollars and quarter-dollars were legal tender for
all purposes at that time and of full weight; and not only were they legal tenders,
but the Spanish milled dollar, the Mexican dollar, and the Mexican quarter-
dollars were also legal tender; and there are plenty of Senators here who remem-
ber that in their youth the Spanish milled dollar and the Spanish quarter and the
Mexican dollar and the Mexican quarter were the common currency of our coun-
try. I have not any doubt that two-thirds of the lands in the State of Illinois
were entered with foreign silver money at the Government offices, where it was
taken by law just as they would have taken a quarter silver dollar of our own
coinage if it had been presented.

Mr. Sherman seemed to be possessed of the idea that we always
had in this country a single standard, either of gold or of silver.
He claims because at one period silver was overvalued and gold left
us, and at another period gold was overvalued and silver left us, that,
therefore, our money standard was at one time only silver and at
another only gold.

109

But the double standard consists in the right to use either or loth
the metals, without limit, as money. The double standard means
the right to discharge obligations in either kind of money .

Mr. Sherman must know that throughout both of the periods re-
ferred to gold and silver were in use as money in Europe and the
United States without limitation, except in England after 1816.
What difference was there, then, in the value of the money whether the
gold and silver circulated half and half in all countries, or more of
one metal in one country and more of the other metal in another
country ? The two metals together constituted the money of all coun-
tries. According to the reasoning of Mr. Sherman, if a man carried
only gold in his pocket, he would be on the gold standard, while one
who carried only silver would be on the silver standard, while onlj
the man who carried half and half of each kind of money would be
on the double standard !

Bimetallism is the unlimited use, or the right to the unlimited use,
of both metals as money in the transaction of business and in the
discharge of all obligations; and that was the condition of the United
States from the establishment of the Government down to 1873, when,
with .an enormous debt resting upon the country, this right was
surreptitiously taken away.

The following are a few points from an able and comprehensive
speech by Mr, Plumb, of Kansas :

There are two questions which it seems to me may be regarded in this matter
of silver legislation as fundamental. One is as to the volume of the currency and
the other is as to what the currency shall consist of.

*******

In this connection it is worth while recalling the action taken by Congress in
1878. In that year, the year preceding resumption, Congress, after long debate,
determined upon a partial remonetization of silver. It restored to full money
functions the silver dollar of 4121^ grains, but limited its coinage by providing that
thereafter there should not be less than $2,000,000 per month of silver coined,
giving to the Secretary of the Treasury the discretion to increase that coinage up
to $4,000,000 per month, a discretion designed to meet such contingency as might
arise calling for an increase in the circulating medium which could not otherwise
be promptly met.

At that time there were in circulation $346,000,000 of legal-tender notes — I speak
now in round numbers — and $337,000,000 of national bank notes. There were also
outstanding at that time over $1,700,000,000 interest- bearing obligations of the Gov-
ernment, on which national-bank circulation might be based. It was not then
anticipated that the circulating notes of the national banks would diminish; on the
contrary, it was believed they would increase in volume. Any one who had sug-
gested that during the succeeding twelve years the national-bank circulation would
have nearly disappeared would have been regarded as visionary. At that time
Congress, after long debate, and by a measure which passed over the veto of the
President, said that the currency of the country should thereafter consist of the
$346,000,000 legal-tender notes outstanding, and not lees than $337,000,000 of
national-bank notes, to which should be arlded at lea«t two millions of silver per
month, to be coined thereafter indefinitely; and of course, all that woald result
from the free coinage of gold.

110

At that time the volume of the business of this country as measured by bank
deposits and bank debts, by railroad debts, by private and municipal deb*8, by the
sum of commercial transactions, and by all the othier things which can be made
use of in determining volume, was not over-half of what it ii to-day. In other
words, the business of this country has at least doubled during the last twelve
years. This increase in business necessitates a great increaae in the volume of
currency supply. Let us see how that need has been met.

The legal-tender currency has not increased, but remains as twelve years ago,
except as it may have been diminished by loss or destruction, and the national-
bank circulation, which Khortly after thesilveractof 1878 increased to $356,000,000,
at which sum it remained only a short period of time, has receded until, on the
first day of the present month, it was only $128,000,000. To cover increasing needs,
and fill the gap made by the disappearing national-bank notes, there has been
only the coinage of $2,000,000 worth per month of silver, and what has resulted
from the free coinage of gold. There has, therefore, been a contraction of the
currency, beyond the possibility of what was contemplated by those who legislated
upon this subject in 1878, of nearly §240,000,000 since that date, and their expecta^
tions and those of the country have been defeated to that extent.

As I said, these anticipations have been defeated, and the circulation of the
country is $240,000,000 less than the least which the framers of the act of 1878 and
those who participated in creating that financial policv which put the country on
a bimetallic basis supposed it would be; and no Secretary of the Treasury has
purchased and had coined a dollar of silver beyond the minimum, notwithstand-
ing the steady decrease of national-bank notes and th'i enormoug increase in the
business of the country. The Treasury Department has always contributed to the

policy of contraction.

* * * * * * *

The Senator from New York [Mr. Hiscock] made a great exhibit on yesterday
of the wealth of this country. It was no doubt a correct one. But he did not tefl
us whether the Finance Committee were debating whether they could not make
it a great deal better by piling up the duties on imported merchaniise from 10 to
300 per cent, in the tarifl' bill which is before them. If it is so good, if there is no
complaint, no cloud in the future, if there is financial health, soundness, prosperity
and if it is all evenly and fairly distributed, why not let well enough alone in
matter} relating to the tariff" as well as the volume of the currency ?

The Senator thinks we do not need legislation increasing the currency because
of our great prosperity under the present system. If this is all true, why revise the
tariff and especially impose new and increased dutiea ? Or are we too prosperous,
whereby the necessity arises for placing new burdens on the people ?

Referring to the Treasury proposition for bullion redemption,

Mr. Plumb said :

I can not look upon the bill which came from the Treasury Department with the
aanction of the Administration as calculated for anything else so much as to restore
the single gold standard — no more silver coinage, no more silver dollars, $360,-
000,000 of them added to whatever gold we may accidently possess to be the basis
upon which 65,O'J0,000 of people, increasing at the rate of 2,000,000 per annum must
hereafterd^ their business; silver to be used only as a commodity, as a basis for the
issue of warehouse certificates. Mr. President, rather than to have that bill become
a law I would willingly see this Congress adjourn without one line of legislation upon
the subject and carry this questiou to the people and get their final verdict upon
it. A return to the gold standard would be a far greater calamity than the con-
tinuance for a year or two longer of the present disastrous policy.

Mr. Cockrell, of Missouri, made a strong argument in favor of the

equal use of both gold and silver as money, as a constitutional ri^ht.

He said :

By our present laws gold bullion has free coinage and can be exchanged at our
mints grain for grain for gold coin, or can be deposited and gold certificates ob-
tained therefor, and gold bullion is therefore practically equal to gold coin and
equivalent to gold money.

Ill

Under the pending; bill eilver bullion is still (o be treated as a mere commodity,
to be purchased in the market just as any other metal can be purchased, and will
be given none of the equivalents of money or currency. Why continue this legal
discrimination and relentless warfare against silver?

It has not always been thus. By tlie common law of England, transplanted in
this country by our ancestors, gold and silver were money and a lawful tender for
the payment of debts down to the adoption of our written Constitution.

■X- * * * * ♦ *

The Constitution of the United States declares that —

'H^ongress sliall have power * * * to coin money, regulate the value thereof,
and of foreign coin, and lix the standard of weights and measures; * * * to
provide for the punishment of counterfeiting the securities and current coin of the
United States."

And further —

" No State shall * * * coin money * * * or make anything but gold
and silver coin a legal tender in payment of debts."

Congress therefore has the exclusive power to coin money and to declare what
eoin shall pasj current as money and to regulate and lix the value of such coin
and of foreign coin as money, as legal tender for the payment of all debts, public
and private, and no State can coin any money or make anything but gold and
silver coin a tender in payment of debts. There is no restriction upon the power
of Congress to coin money and regulate its value, either as to the metal to be
coined into money or the weight or quantity of the metal, the value of which
when coined Congress can regulate and fix.

****** -x-

The future currency of this great country should be, and I hope will be, the legal-
tender United States or Treasury notes, coin certilicates based upon deposits of
ooin or bullion of gold and silver, held in the Treasury for their redemption, and
of actual coin.

Such a currency is demanded by our people and is necessary for their use as
money-
Mr. Eustis, of" Louisiana, referring to the act of 1878, passed over
the veto of President Hayes, said :

Mr. President : I desire to ask in the light of experience what solitary individual
ki the United States from 1878 to the present moment has ever been defrauded by
fhe coinage of silver? Who has ever preferred any just complaint against this law
which was passed over the Executive veto?

When, in other parts of his message, the President of the United States used
the argument that this law would discredit the public faith and impair the public
credit, I ask, in the light of the experience of the last twelve years since that law
was passed, when was the credit of the Government of the United States higher
than it has been since that law was passed? When was its public faith more
sacredly observed ? When did its credit rank higher in the estimation of the
world, in the estimation of the bondholders, in the estimation of public creditors
tlhan it has since 1878 when that law was passed?

Mr, Aldrich, in an elaborate speech, favoring further international

action, admitted, however, the necessity of a readjustment of our

money system and an increase of the currency. He said :

The progressive retirement of national-bank notes has imposed upon Congress
the duty of undertaking some readjustment of our currency system. A plan for
this readjustment is suggested by the bill now under consideration reported from
the Committee on Finance.

Among the issues involved in the consideration of this bill and the various sub-
stitutes proposed, the most important from every standpoint is to determine the
effect which the several measures would have upon the future status of silver as a
money metal. The decision of the United States to promote the restoration of
silver was made by the act of Congress of February 28, 1878, and reaffirmed by
the formal declaration of its official representatives of the monetary conferences
of 1878 and 1881.

112

This Congress can not pass an act which will be a finality upon this great ques-
tion. It must be tentative and experimental ; a meapure liable to repeal or modi-
fication in a wider sense than is usual with such acts. The final object of our policy
is to establish a legal equality between gold and silver. Gold is universally inter-
national money to-day, silver is not ; it will not be international money should
this bill be passed. It remains for the Legislatures which have given gold the
privilege by virtue of which it holds its rank as universal money to give a similar
privilege to silver. Until this is done there can be no equality as money between
the two metals. This is the fact of all facts, and it is useless for Senators to en-
deavor to persuade themselves or attempt to persuade others to the contrary.
This fact defioes in advance the limitations upon the policy of Congress. It is
well we should all fully understand that the expectant attitude of the past must
be maintained.

The bill reported from Ihe Finance Committee was prepared with a view of
keeping within these limitations. To this distinctively pro-silver measure, which
I believe to be wise and conservative, are opposed propositions for free coinage
and for the unlimited purchase of silver bullion.

The speech of Mr. Stewart, of Nevada, giving the full record of
the act of 1873 in the Senate, has been referred to, but a correct idea
of it cannot be conveyed by extracts ; to understand the record the
epeecli must be read in full.

Mr. Mitchell, of Oregon, made a speech early in the session, con-
taining valuable statistics showing the effect of a shrinking volume of
money on the prices of agricultural products, and advocating the
full restoration of silver.

Most of the Senators from the South spoke on the side of free
coinage. Many of the speeches showed wide investigation and
correct knowledge of monetary principles. The following is from
the speech of Mr. Daniel, of Virginia, delivered May 22d :
No Danger of Too Much Money.

Mr. President, let us ask ourselves this question, are we going to have too much
money in America by reason of the free coinage of silver? I have already shown
from the report of the Secretary of the Treasury that it can not exceed the amount
of about a dollar a head per year for the whole American population. The fact must
be conceded that with the increasing volume of money prices will rise.

When prices are increasing money is seldom hoarded, because there is every
temptation to its free use. Money is generally hoarded when prices are declining,
because the money- holder says to himself, " If I wait I can buy cheaper." On the
contrary, he rushes to invest when prices are rising, because he says to himself,
" If I buy to-day I can sell for more to-morrow." Now it is acknowledged that
as soon as silver is admitted to free coinage there will be a tendency of prices up-
ward.

Anticipation of More Money Stimulates Prices.

The very anticipation of free silver coinage has given a rise to stocks and prices
in New York and an upward tendency everywhere. And, therefore, as prices
will rise with free coinage it is natural and logical to assume that money will not
be hoarded as long as that tendency exists.

Gold AVill Not Leave While Investments Here Tempt It. v

Unless by the operation of other causes, gold is not likely to leave this country
when silver is admitted to free coinage. Nor will it ever leave this country until it
finds a better field of investment elsewhere than it can find here. As long as this
country has lands, minerals, stocks and bonds, and other properties inviting invest-
ment at better rates than are off'ered elsewhere, money will have no tendency to quit
our shores for foreign parts. Investors are not turned away from buying our stocks

113

and bonds by the anticipation of more money through free silver coinage. They
look to the maintenance of prices here, and hence they seek our shores.

Gold Not Likely To Go To a Premium.
Nor is the gold dollar likely to go to a prf miiim over the silver dolls r. What
condition will exist to drive it to a premium? What use will there be for a gold
dollar making it desirable that a man shall part with more than one silver dollar
in order to get a gold dollar? He can pay as much tax with h's silver dollar as
with a gold dollar. He can discharge as nruch debt with his silver dollar aa with
a gold dollar. He can buy as much of any commodi'y with his silver dollar as
with a gold dollar ; and why then shall he give more than a silver dollar in order
to g«t a gold dollar ? After he has gotten it it would render him no greater service.

The following is from a speech by Mr. Harris, of Tennessee, in

•which the true theory of money is well stated :

Upon the financial question there are certain axiomatic facts which should con-
trol the ac'ion of the legislator.

First. That mone> is tue medium of t-xchanga of commodities in all civilized
-countries and between all countries.

Secondly. The amount of money circulating in the country fixes the price of
all propel ty and labor which are exchanged for money ; and

Thirdly. That the law of demand and supply appliet^ as well to money as to all
other things of value, so that when the demand for money exceeds the supply,
like everything else its market price is increased in the ratio of the excess of de-
mand over the supply.

Or, to state the proposition in a different form of words, diminish the amount or
volume of money in the country, and the reduced volume will have the same pur-
chasing power, and will buy as much land, labor, and the pr-ducts of labor as the
larger volume would have bought before the amount was reduced.

To illustrate:

If the amount of money in this country to-day shouM be reduced to one-half of
that amount to-morrow, as soon as the business of the country could adjust itself
to the nevF condition each dollar of this reduced volume would buy twice as much
labor, twice as much property as it could have bought bffore the volume was so
leduced, n'>t because the utility or real value of either land, labor, or the products
of labor had depreciated, but because money had in'Tcased in price by reason of
the fact that the demand for money was so far in excess of the supply.

Upon this question there is a sharp aud well defioed conflict between the inter-
ests of capi al and labor, creditor and debtor classes.

The capitalist, whose wealtti consists of money, bonds, and mortgages, is directly
interested in reducing the amount of money in the country, because it increases
the purchasing power, in the ratio of such redu'^tion. of his capital, which is fixed
in amount by ihe securities he holds ; and whether the."e is much or little money
in the country, he demands and receives his stipulated number of dollars.

The debtor has contracted to pay dollars, and he must pay dollars without re-
gard to the amount of labor or property it takes to obtain them ; the debt-paying
power of moDey not being increased, however much the volume may have been
reduced.

But the interest of the laborer, the producer, and the debtor demand an in-
creased and constantly increasing volume fif money, because in the ratio of such
increase the wages of labor and the price of property will advance.

If there were no debts, no outstanding obligations, it would not matter whether
the volume of money in the country was large or small, as the businees of the coun-
try would a<1ju8t itself to that volume whatever it might be.

Then, if tne legislator would avoid flactuaions hurtful to one or the other of
these cojaflictirg interests of creditors and debtors, and maintain existing relations
betweeen money and property, capital and labor, the volu ne of money in circula-
tion should increase in the ratio of increase of population and business of the
country.

The quotations above given fall far short of doing justice to the de-
bate in the Senate, but want of space prevents the extension of these
extracts.

CHAPTER IX.

The Senate Free Coinage Bill in the House.

The free coinage bill, which passed the Senate as a substitute
for the House bill (5381), went to the House June 18, and was re-
ferred by the Speaker, without the order of the House, to the Com-
mittee on Coinage, Weights and Measures. This reference was
called in question when the House met on the 19th, by Mr. Mills, of
Texas, who objected to the approval of the Journal which containei
the reference of the bill.

The following is the record on the question of the approval of the
Journal, which carried the Senate bill to the Committee on Coinage ,
Weights and Measures, thereby preventing a direct vote on free
coinage in the House :

Thursday, June 19, 1890. The House met at 12 o'clock m.

The Journal.

The Journal of the proceedings of yesterday was read.

The SPEAKER. If there be no objection, the Journal as read will be ap-
proved.

Mr. MILLS. I object to the approval of the Journal.

Mr. BRECKINRID3E, of Kentucky. Let the entire Journal be read. I think
the reference of bills has not been read, as well as other matters which properly
belong to the Journal.

The SPEAKER It has not been. Only the usual portions have been read.

Mr. McKINLEY. I move that the Journal be approved, and upon that I de-
mand the previous question.

Mr. MILLS. I move to correct the Journal as follows

Mr. BRECKINRIDGE, of Kentucky. I rise to a question of order. The motion
of the gentleman from Ohio is not in order until the Journal has been read
through. The Clerk has not read the entire Journal.

The SPEAKER. The Journal has not been read in full.

Mr. McKINLEY. I supposed the Clerk had concluded the reading of the
Journal.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the remain ler of the Journal. Any
member has a right to demand the reading of the Journal in full.

Mr. MILLS. I move to correct the Journal in the following particulars, Mr..
Speaker

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the Journal. The Clerk had only com-
pleted the reading of those portions of the Journal which are usually read.

House Bill With Senate Amendments Referred.

Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, a House bill of the following title with Senate
amendments was taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows:

"A bill (H. R 5381) directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of
Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes — to the Committee on Coinage,
"Weights and Measures."

Mr. McKINLEY. Now, Mr. Speaker, I move the approval of the! Journal, and
on that I demand the previous question.

Mr. MILLS. I have the floor to move a correction of the Journal.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio submits amotion which is in order.

Mr. MILLS. I have the floor and the gentleman from Ohio can not take pos-
session of it without my consent to make his motion.

115

The SPEAKER. The Clerk informs the Chair that the entire Journal has not
yet been read.

The Clerk resumed and concluded the reading of the Journal relating to the ref-
erence of bills, petitions, etc., under the rule.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio

Mr. McKINLEY. I move that the Journal of the proceedings of yesterday be
approved, and upon that I demand the previous question.

■ Mr. MILLS. The gentleman from Ohio certainly does not want to prevent a
correction of the Journal.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Ohio demands the previous question.

Mr. MILLS. The scent of the gentleman is keen ; he smells the battle afar off.

On the demand for the previous question I ask the yeas and nays.

Mr. SPRINGER. I rise to a question of order. I make the point of order that
a portion of the Rscord just read by the Clerk forms no part of the Journal of the
House ; and can not be a part of the Journal of the House. I make the point that
the Clerk has read, as of the Journal of the House, a fcict which can not properly
go into the proceedings of this House, because it did not take place in the House,
to wit, the fact that certain Senate bills were referred to committees, particularly
the amendments of the Senate to the House bill 5381

The SPEAKER. That is a question for the House to determine.

The question is on the demand of the gentleman from Texas for the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were oidered,

Mr. SPRINGER. Does the Speaker deny the right of a Representative on this
floor to Fubmit a question of order ?

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr, SPRIN GER. Does the Speaker deny my right to raise the question of order ?
You may ignore it, and put down the Representatives of the people on this floor ;
but the people will put you down, sir, at the polls in November [applause and
cheers on the Democratic side], and your party with you.

The question was taken ; and there were — yeas 105, nays 117, not

voting 105 ; as follows:

YEAS— 105.

Adam?,

Candler, Mass.

Gifibrd,

Morrill,

Stephenson,

Allen, Mich.

Cannon,

Greenhalge,

Mors^,

Stewart, Vt.

AndersoUjKans

, Caswell,

Hall,

O'Donnell,

Stivers,

Arnold,

Cheadie,

Hansbrough,

O'Neill, Pa.

Stock bridge.

Atkinson,W.Va

. Cogswell,

Harmer,

Ooborne,

Struble,

Baker,

Comstock,

Haugen,

Payson,

Sweney,

Bank?,

Conger,

Henderson, 111.

Pickler,

Taylor, E. B.

Beck with,

Culbertson, Pa.

Hill,

Post,

Taylor, J. D.

Belden,

Cutcheon,

Hitt,

Pugsley,

Thomas,

Belknap,

De Lano,

Kin«ey,

Reed, Iowa,

Thompson,

Bingham,

DoUiver.

Knapp,

Reyburn,

Vandever,

Bliss,

Bunnell,

Lacey,

Rife,

Van Schaick,

Boothman,

Evans,

Laidlaw,

Rowell,

Waddill,

Bou telle.

Farquhar,

Laws,

Russell,

Walker, Mass.

Brewer,

Finley,

Lodge,

Sawyer,

Wallace, Mass.

Brosiug,

Flick,

McCormick,

Sherman,

Wallace, N. Y.

Brower,

Flood,

McKenna,

Simon ds.

Watson,

Buchanan, N. J.

, Frank,

McKinley,

Smith, W. Va.

Wickham,

Burrows,

Funston,

Miles,

Smyser,

Williams, Ohio

Burfon,

Gear,

Moffitt,

Snider,

Wright,

Butter worth,

Gest,

Moore, N. H.

NAYS-117.

Spooner,

Yardley.

Alderson,

Clarke, Ala.

Grimes,

McClellan,

Spinola,

Anderson, Miss.

Clements,

Hare,

McCreary,

Springer, Ga.

Bankhead,

Cobb,

Hayes,

McMillan,

Stewart, Tex.

Barnes,

Cooper, Ind.

Haynes,

McRae,

Stockdale,

116

Bartine,

Bland,

Blount,

Breckinridge, Ark,

Breckinridge, Ky.

Brick ner,

Brookshire,

Brown, J. B.

Brunner,

Buclianan, Va.

Buf'kalew,

Bollock,

Bynutn,

Campbell,

Candler, Ga.

Carlton,

Carter,

Caruth,

Ca'chings,

Chipman,

Cowles,

Grain,

Crisp,

Cu]berson,Te2.

Cummings,

Davidson,

DeHaven,

Dockery,

Dunphy,

Edmunda,

Elliott,

Ellis,

Enloe,

Fitch,

Fithian,

Form:in,

Forney,

Fowler,

Geissenhainer,

Goodnight,

Heard,

Hemphill,

Henderson,N

Herbert,

Hnlman,

Kelley,

Kerr, Iowa,

Kerr, Pa.

Ki'gore,

Lane,

Lnnham,

Lee,

Lester, Ga.

Lewis, .

Lind,

Maish,

Mansur,

Martin, Ind.

McAdoo,

McClammy,

Mills,

Montgomery,
,C.Mf)ore, Tex.
Morrow,
Mutchler,
Norton,
O'Neall, Ind.
O'Neil, Maes.
Owens, Mass.
Parrett,
Paynter,
Peel,

Penington,
Perry,
Quinn,
Reilly,
Richardson,
Robertson,
Sayers,
Shively,

Stone, Ky.
Stone, Mo.
Tarsney,
Tillman,
TowEsend, Col.
Tracey,
Turner, Ga.
Turner, N. Y.
Vaux,

Wheeler, Ala.
Whiting,
Whitthorne,
Wilkinson,
Williams, 111.
Wilson, Mo.
Wilson, W. Va.

Those not voting and pairs are omitted.

The SPEAKER. Oa this question the yeas are 105, and the nays are 117; and
the House refuses to order the previous question. [Applause on the Democratic
Bide.]

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I offer the following resolution, to correct the Jour-
nal.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas offers the following resolution for
the correction of the Journal, which the Clerk will read :

The Clerk read as follows :

Whereas the order of reference made by the Speaker referring House bill 5381
which » as returned to the House yesterday with a Senate amendment, to the
Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, was incorrect under the rules of
tiie House and without authority under said rules : Therefore,

Bfsolved, That the Journal of yesterday, Wednesday, June 18,',be corrected by
striking therefrom this entry, to wit:

" Under clause 2 of Rule XXIV, a House bill of the followiug title with Senate
amendments was taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows :

"A bill (H. R. 5381) directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of
Treaeury notes thereon, and for other purposes — to the Committee on Coinage,
Weights and Measures."

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker

Mr. C VNNON. Mr. Speaker, to that I raise a pointof order.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker

The SPE ^ KER. For what purpose does the gentleman from Illinois rise?

Mr. CANNON. To that resolution I make the point of order

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois has the right to make'a point of
order.

Mr. CANNON. I supposed so.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman will state his point of order.

Mr. CANNON. My point of order is that the resolution is not in order for the
following reasons : First, it proposes to strike out an entry in the Journal that
records a matter of fact. Second, it is not in order for the reason, under the rule,
that if adopted it would have the eflfect, if it has any effect at all, to change a refer-
ence of a bill with a Senate amendment otherwise than as provided by the rules.
Rule XXIV, clause 2, is as follows :

2. BuBiness on the Speaker's table shall be disposed of as follows:

Messages from the President shall be referred to the appropriate committees
with( ut debate. Reports and communications from the heads of Departments,
and other communications addressed to the House, and billp, resolutions, and
messages from the Senate may be referred to the appropriate committees in the
same manner, and with the same right of correction as public bills presented bj

members; but House bills with Sanate amendments which do not require con-
sideration in a Committee of the Whole, may be at once disposed of as the House
may determine, as may also Senate bills substantially the same as House bills
already favorably reported.by a committee of the House, and not required to be
considered in Committee of the Whole, may also be disposed of in the same man-
ner on motion directed to be made by such ijommittee.

A long discussion followed, participated in in favor of the motion
to approve the Journal, by Messrs. Cannon, Butterworth, Peters,
Burrows, and others ; and against the reference by Messrs. Mills,
Breckinridge, Williams, Blount, Anderson of Kansas, Bland, and
others. The Speaker also made a statement explaining his refer-
ence of the bill to the Coinage Committee. Mr, Mills moved the
previous question on his resolution. Mr. Cannon moved to lay this
resolution on the table.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken ; and there were — yeas 118, nays 123, not
voting 86, as follows :

YEAS— 118.

Adam?,

Cheadle,

Henderson, 111.

O'Donnell,

Stephenson,

Allen, Mich.

Cogswell,

Hill,

O'Neill, Pa.

Slew art, Vt.

Anderson. Kans.

Comstock,

Hitt,

Osborne,

Stivf^rs,

Arnold,

Conger,

Kerr, Iowa,

Owen,Ind.

Stockbridge,

Atkinson, W, Va.

Culbertson, Pa

. Ketcham,

Payson,

Sfcruble,

Baker,

Cutcheon,

Kinsey,

Pickler,

Sweney,

Banks,

Dalzpll,

Kjiapp,

Post,

Taylor, E, B.

Beckwith,

Dargan,

Lacey,

Pugsley,

Taylor, J. D.

Belden,

De ]-.ano,

La Follette,

Raines,

Thomas,

Belknap,

Dolliver,

Laidlaw,

Randall,

Thompson,

Bingham,

Bunnell,

Laws,

Reed, Iowa,

Turner, Kans.

Bliss,

Evans,

Lind,

Reyburn,

Vandever,

Boothman,

Farquhar,

Lodge,

Rife,

Van Schaick,

Boutelle,

Finlev,

McCormick,

Rockwell,

Waddill,

Brewer,

Flick."

McKeana,

Rowell,

Walker, Mass.

Brosius,

Flood,

McKinley,

Russell,

Wallace, Mass.

B rower,

Frank,

Miles,

Sanford,

Wallace, N. Y.

Buchanan, N. J.

Funston,

Milliken,

Sawyer,

Wickham,

Burrows,

Gear,

Moffitt,

Sherman,

Williams, Ohio,

Burton,

Gifford,

Moore, N. H.

Simonds,

Wilson, Ky.

Butterworth,

Greenhalge,

Morrill,

Smith, W. Va.

Wright,

Candler, Mass.

Hall,

Morse,

Smyser,

Yardley.

Cannon,

Hansbrough,

Mudd,

Snider,

Caswell,

Haugen,

Niedringhaus,
NAYS— 123.

Spooner,

Abbott,

Caruth,

Geissenhainer,

McCreary,

Skinner,

Alderson,

Catchings,

Goodnight,

McMillin,

Spinola,

Anderson, Miss.

Chipman,

Grimes,

McRae,

Springer,

Bankhead,

Clarke, Ala.

Hare,

Mills,

Stewart, Ga.

Barnes,

Clements,

Hayes,

Montgomery,

Stewart, Tex.

Bartiae,

Ciunie,

Haynes,

Moore, Tex.

Stockdale,

Bigg.?,

Cobb,

Heard,

Morrow,

Stone, Mo.

Blanchard,

Cooper, Tnd.

Hemphill,

Mutchler,

Stump,

Bland,

Cothran,

Hender8on,N.C.Norton,

Tarsney,

Blount,

Cowles,

Herbert,

Gates,

Tillman,

Boatner,

Crisp,

Holman,

O'Neall, Ind.

Townsend, Col.

118

Breckinridge, Ark. Culberson,Tex. Kelley,

Breckinridge, Ky. Cummings,
Brickner, Davidson,

Brooksliire,

De Haven,

Brown, J. B.

Dockery,

Brunner,

Dunphy,

Bachanan, Va.

Edmunds,

Backalew,

Elliott,

Bullock,

Ellis,

Bynum,

Enloe,

Campbell,

■ Ewart,

Candler, Ga.

Fithian,

Carlton,

Forman,

Carter,

Fowler,

Kerr, Pa.

Kilgore,

Lane,

LanLam,

Lester, Ga.

Lewis,

Magner,

Maish,

Mansur,

Martin, Ind.

McAdoo,

McClammy,

McClellan,

O'Neil, Mass.

Owens, Ohio,

Barrett,

Paynter,

Peel,

Penington,

Perry,

Quinn,

Reilly,

Richardson,

Robertson,

Sayers,

Seney,

Shively,

Tucker,
Turner, Ga.
Turner, N. Y.
Vaux,

Wheeler, Ala.
Whiting,
Whitthorne,
Wilkinson,
Willcox,
Williams, III.
Wilson, Mo.
Wilson, W. Va.

So the motion was rejected.

The motion to lay on the table having been lost, the question re-
curred upon the motion of Mr. Mills, for the previous question. The
previous question was ordered.

The question then recurred on Mr. Mills' resolution to amend the
Journal so as to bring the bill directly before the House. The yeas
and nays were ordered.

The question was taken ; and it was decided in the affirmative —
yeas 121, nays 117, as follows:

Abbott,

Alderson,

Anderson, Miss.

Bankhead,

Barnes,

Bartine,

Bland,

Blount,

Boatner,

Breckinridge, Ark,

Breckinridge, Ky.

Brickner,

Brookehire,

Brown, J. B.

Brunner,

Buchanan, Va.

Buckalew,

Bullock,

Bynum,

Candler, Ga.

Carlton,

Carter,

Caruth,

Catchingp,

Adams,
Allen, Mich.
Anderson, Kans.
Arnold,

Clarke, Ala.

Clements,

Clunie,

Cobb,

Cooper, Ind.

Cothran,

Cowles,

Crisp,

Culberson, Tex.

Cummings,

Davidson,

De Haven,

Dockery,

Dnnphy,

Edmunds,

Elliolt,

Ellis,

Ealoe,

Fitch,

Fithian,

Forman,

Fowler,

Geissenhainer,

Goodnight,

Grimes,

Cheadle,
Cogswell,
Comstock,
Conger,

YEAS— 12L

Hare,

Hayes,

Haynes,

Heard,

Plemphill,

Henderson,N,

Herbert,

Holman,

Kelley,

Kerr, Pa. •

Kilgore,

Lane,

Lanham,

Lester, Ga.

Lewis,

Magner,

Maish,

Mansur,

Martin, Ind.

McAdoo,

McClammy,

McClellan,

McCreary,

McKinlev,

McMillin^

NAYS— 117.

Hill,
Hitt,

Kerr, Iowa.
Ketcham,

McRae,

Mills,

Montgomery,
Moore, Tex.
Morrow,
C.Mutchler,
Norton,
Gates,

O'Neall, Ind.
O'Neil, Mass.
Owens, Ohio,
Parrett,
Paynter,
Peel,

Penington,
Perrv,
Reilly,
Richardson,
Robertson,
Sayerp,
Seney,
Shively,
Skinner,
Spinola,
Springer,

Osbcrne,
Owen, Ind.
Payeon,
Pickler,

Stewart, Ga.
Stewart, Tex.
Stockdale,
Stone, Mo.
Stump,
Tarsney,
Tillman,
Townsend, Col.
Tucker,
Turner, Ga.
Turner, N. Y.
Vaux,

Wheeler, Ala.
Whiting,
Whitthorne,
Wiley,
Wilkinson,
Willcox,
Williams, 111.
Wilson, Mo.
Wilson, W. Va.

Stivers,
Stockbridge,
Struble,
Sweney,

119

ckiDson, W. Va. Culbertson, Pa. Kinsey,

Baker,

Banks,

Beckwith,

Belden,

Belknap,

Bingham,

Biiss,

Booth man,

Boutelle,

Brewer,

Brosius,

Brewer,

Bachanan, N. J.

Burrows,

Burton,

Butter worth,

Oandler, Mass.

■Cannon,

CJaawell,

Cutcheon,

Ddlzell,

De Lano,

DoUiver,

Dunnell,

Evans,

Farquhar,

Finley,

Flick,

Flood,

Frank,

Funston,

Gear,

Gi fiord,

Greenhalge,

Hall,

Hansbrough,

Haugen,

Knapp,

Lacey,

La Follette,

Laidlaw,

Laws,

Lind,

Lodge,

McCormick,

McKenna,

Miles,

Millikin,

Moffitt,

Moore, N. H.

Morril),

Moree,

Mudd.

Poet,

Pugsley,

Raines,

Randall,

R*^ed, Iowa,

Reyburn,

Rife,

Rockwell,

Rowell,

Russell,

Sanford,

Sawyer,

Sherman,

Simonds,

Taylor, E. B.
Taylor, J. D.
Thomas,
Thompson,
Tracey,
Turner, Kans.
Vandever,
Van Schaick,
Waddill,
Walker, Mass.
Wallace, Mass,
Wallace, N.Y.
Wickham,
Williams, Ohio.

Smith, W. Va, Wilson, Ky

Smyser,
Snider

Niedringhaus, Spooner,
O'Donnell, Stephenson,
' Stewart, Vt.

Wright,
Yardley.

Henderson, 111. O'Neill, Pa.

So the resolution was adopted.

Mr. Funston, of Kansas, changed his vote from ''aye" to
^' nay." Mr. McKinley having changed his vote moved to recon-
sider the vote by which the resolution was adopted. Mr. Mills
moved to lay that motion on the table. Pending that, Mr. McKin-
ley moved that the House adjourn. The yeas and nays were ordered
on Mr. McKinley 's motion to adjourn, and ii was decided in the nega-
tive — yeas 119, nays 120, not voting 88.

The question then recurred upon Mr. Mills' motion to lay on the
table Mr. McKinley's motion to reconsider the vote by which Mr.
Mills' resolution was adopted. The yeas and nays were ordered,
the result being — yeas 121, nays 114.

Mr. Mills then moved the approval of the Journal as amended. The
Speaker held that the preamble must first be disposed of. The pre-
amble is as follows :

Whereas the order of reference made by the Speaker referring House bill
5881, which was returned to the House yesterday with a Senate amendment, to
the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, was incorrect under the rules
of the House and done without authority under said rules

On this question the yeas were 109 and the nays 121.
the House adjourned.

When the House met June 20th —

Thereupon

The SPE \.KER said : The question before the House is the motion of the
^ntleman from Texas [Mr. Mills] for the previous question upon the motion
4o approve the Journal of the proceedings of Wednesday last.

Mr. MILLS. It was my motion to approve the Journal as amended.

Mr. McKINLEY. We both made the motion to approve the Journal.

Mr. MILLS. But I made the motion to approve the Journal as amended.

The SPEAKER. There is no question about that whatever.

120

The question was taken ; and there were-

foUows :

YEAS— 126.

-yeas 126, nays 122, as-

Abbotc,

Alderson,

Anderson, Miss.

Bankhead,

Barnes,

Bartine,

Biggs,

Blanchard,

Bland,

Blount,

Boatner,

Breckinridge, Ark

Breckinridge, Ky.

Brickner,

Brookshire,

Brown, J. B.

Brunner,

Buchanan, Va.

Bullock,

Bunn,

Bynum,

Campbell,

Carlton,

Carter,

Caruth,

Chipman,

Clements,

Clunie,

Cobb,

Cothran,

Cowries,

Grain,

Crisp,

Culberson,Tex.

Cummings,

Dargaa,

Davidson,

.Dri Haven,

Dockery,

Dunphy,

Elliott,

Ellis,

Enloe,

Fitch,

Fithian,

Forman,

Forney,

Fowler,

Geissenhainer,

Gibson,

Goodnight,

Grimes,

Adams,

Allen, Mich.

Anderson, Kans.

Arnold,

Atkinson, W. Va.

Baker,

Banks,

Beckwith,

Belden,

Belknap,

Bergen,

Bingham,

Bliss,

Boothman,

Boutelle,

Bowden,

Brewer,

Brosiug,

Brower,

Browne, Va.

Buchanan, N. J.

Barrows,

Burton,

Batterworth,

Candler, Mass.

Cannon,

Caswell,

Cheadle,

Cogswell,

Comstock,

Cong-^r,

Culberteon, Pa.

Cutcheon,

Dalzell,

De Lano,

DoUiver,

Bunnell,

Evans,

Farquhar,

Finley,

Flood,

Frank,

Funston,

Gear,

Gest,

Glfford,

Greenhalge,

Grosvenor,

Hall,

Hansbrough,

Hare,

Hayes,

Haynes,

Heard,

Hemphill,

H«Dder8on,N

Herbert,

Hermann,

Holman,

Kelley,

Kilgjre,

Lane,

Lanham,

Lee,

Lester, Ga.

Lester, Va.

Lewis,

Magner,

Maish,

Mansur,

Martin, Ind.

McAdoo,

McClammy,

McClellan,

Mc('reary,

McKinley,

NAYS— 122.

Harmer,

Haugen,

Henderson, 111.

Henderson, la.

Hill,

Hitt,

Kennedy,

Ketcham,

Kinsey,

Lacey,

La Follette,

Laid law.

Laws,

Lehlbach,

Lind,

Lodge,

McComas,

McCormick,

McKenna,

Miles,

Milliken,

Moffitt,

Moore, N. H.

Morrill,

Morse,

MeMillin,
McRae,
Mills,

Montgomery,
Moore, Tex.
C.Morrow,
Norton,
Gates,

O'Neall, Ind.
O'Neil, Mass.
Parrett,
Paynter,
Peel,

Penington,
Perry,
Quinn,
Reilly.
Richardson,
Robertson,
Rowland,
Rick,
Savers,
Shively,
Spinola,
Springer,
Stewart, Ga.

Mudd,

Niedringhaus,

Neil), Pa.

Osborne,

Pay son,

Perkins,

Pickler,

Post,

Raines,

Randall,

Reed, Iowa,

Reyburn,

Rife,

Rockwell,

Rowell,

Russell,

Sawyer,

Scull,

Sherman,

Simonds,

Smith, 111.

Smith, W.

Smyser,

Snider,

Spooler,

Stewart, Tex.

Stockdale,

Stone, Ky.

Stump,

Tarsney,

Tillman,

Townsend, Col.

Tucker,

Turner, Ga.

Turner, N. Y.

Vaux,

Venable,

Wheeler,

Whiting,

Whitthorne,

Wike,

Wilkinson,

Willcox,

Williams, 111.

Wilson, Mo.

Wilson, W. Va.

Yoder.

Va.

Stephenson,.
Stewart, Vt^
Stivers,
StockbridgCj.
Struble,
Sweney,
Taylor, E. B.
Taylor, J. D.
Thomas,
Tracey,
Turner, Kans.
Vandever,
Van Schaickr
Waddill,
Walker, Mass.
Wallace, Mass.
Wallace, N. Y.
Wickham,
Williams, Ohio>.,
Wilson, Ky.
Wright,
Yardley.

So the previous question was ordered.

Mr. McKinley thereupon moved to reconsider the vote just takea»
The following colloquy will explain the vote next taken.

121

Mr. McKINLEY. I move to reconsider the vote just taken.

Mr. BLAND. I make the point of order that that is a dilatory motion.

Mr. MIIjLS. I move that the motion to reconsider be laid upon the table.

The SPEAKER proceeded to submit the question.

Mr. MILLS. Let u^ have the yeas and nays.

Mr. SPRINGER. Yes ; we may as well have the yeas and nays at once, to save
time.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The SPEAKER. Thf yeas and nays are ordered on the motion of the gentle-
man from Texas, which is to lay upon the table the motion of the gentleman from
Ohio for reconsideration of the vote last taken, and the Clerk will call the roll.

The question was taken ; and there were — yeas 131, nays 129, not voting 67.

So the motion to lay on the table was agreed to.

The SPEAKER. The previou'i question is ordered and the question now recurs-
upon the approval of the Journal as amended.

Vote to Correct the Journal.

Mr. McKINLEY. Upon that I demand the yeas and nays.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken ; and there were — yeas 132, nays 130, as follows :

Abbott,

Alderson,

Anderson, Miss.

Bankhead,

Barnes,

Bartine,

Biggs,

Blanchard,

Bland,

Blount,

Boatner,

Breckinridge, Ark.

Breckinridge, Ky.

Brick ner,

Brookehire,

Brown, J. B.

Brunner,

Buchanan, Va.

Buckalew,

Bullock,

Bunn,

Bynum,

Campbell,

Carlton,

Carter,

Caruth,

Chipman,

Adams,
Allen, Mich.
Anderson, Kans.
Arnold,

Atkinson, W. Va.
Baker,
Banks,
Beckwith,
Belden,

Clarke, Ala.

Clements,

Clunie,

Cobb,

Cooper, Ind.

Cothran,

Cowles,

Crain,

Crisp,

Culberson,Tex.

Cummings,

Dargan,

Davidson,

De Haven,

Dockery,

Dunphy,

Edmunds,

Elliott,

Ellis,

Enloe,

Fitch,

Fithian,

Forman,

Forney,

Fowler,

Geissenhainer,

Gibson,

Caswell,

Cheadle,

Cogswell,

Comstock,

Conger,

Culbertson, Pa.

Cutcbeon,

Dalzell,

De Lano,

YEAS— 132.

Goodnight,

Grimes,

Hare,

Hayes,

Haynes,

Heard,

Hemphill,

Hender80n,N,

Herbert,

Hermann,

Hoi man,

Kelley,

Kilgore,

Lane,

Lanham,

Lee,

LesTer, Ga.

Lester, Va.

Lewis,

Magner,

Maish,

Mansur,

Martin, Ind.

McAdoo,

McClammy,

McClellan,

McCrearV;

NAYS— 130.

McMillin,
McRae,
Mills,

Montgomery,
Moore, Tex.
Morrow,
Norton,
C.Oates,
O'Neall, Ind.
O'Neil, Mass.
Owens, Ohio,
Parrett,
Paynter,
Peel,

Penington,
Perry,
Quinn,
Reilly,
Richardson,
Robertson,
Rowland,
Rusk,
Siyerri,
Shively,
Spinola,
Springer,
Stewart, Ga.

Harmer,

Hauger,

Henderson, 111.

Henderson, la.

Hill

Hitt,

Kennedy,

Kerr, Iowa,

Ketcham,

Morrill,
Morse,
Mudd,

Niedringhaus,
O'Neill, Pa.
Osborne,
Owen, Ind.
Pay son,
Perkins,

Stewart, Tex.

Stock dale.

Stone, Ky.

Stone, Mo.

Stump,

Tarsney,

Tillman,

TownsendjCola*

Tucker,

Turner, Ga.

Turner, N. Y.

Vaux,

Venable,

Wheeler, Ala.

WhiLing,

Whitthorne,

Wike,

Wiley,

Wilkinson,

Willcox,

Williams, 111.

AVilson, Mo.

Wilson, W. Va.

Y'oder.

Smith, W. Va.

Smyser,

Snider,

Spooner,

Stephenson,

Stewart, Vl.

Stivers,

Stockbridge,

Struble,

122

Selknap,

Uolliver,

Kinsey,

Pickler,

Sweney,

Bergen,

Dunnell,

Knapp,

Post,

Taylor, E.B.

Bingham,

Evane,

Lacey,

Pugsley,

Taylor, J. D.

Bliss,

Ewart,

La Follette,

Raines,

Thomas,

Boothman,

Farquhar,

Laidlaw,

Randall,

Tracey,

Boutelle,

Finley,

Lawp,

Reed, Iowa,

Turner, Kans.

Bowden,

Flick,

Lehlbach,

Reyburn,

Vandever,

Brewer,

Flood,

Lind,

Rife,

Van Schaick,

Brosius,

Frank,

Lodge,

Rockwell,

Waddill,

Brower,

Funston,

McComas,

Rowell,

Walker, Mass.

Browne, Va.

Gear,

McOormick,

RusseH,

Wallace, Mass.

Buchanan, N. J.

Gest,

McKenna,

Sanford,

Wallace, N. Y.

Burrows,

Gifford,

McKinley,

Sawyer,

Wickham,

Burton,

Greenhalge,

Milep,

Scull,

Williams, Ohio,

Butte rworth.

Grosvenor,

Milliken,

Sherman,

Wilson, Kv.

Candler, Maes.

Hall,

Moffitt,

Simonds,

Wright,

Cannon,

Hansbrough,

Moore, N. H.

Smith, 111.

Yardley.

So the Journal as amended was approved.

At this point Mr. Stewart, of Vermont, presented a conference re-
port. Mr. Bland raised the question of consideration, in order to go
to the Speaker's table and take up the silver bill, and on that quse-
tion the yeas and nays were ordered, and the House decided to con-
eider the conference report instead of going to the Speaker's table
to take up the silver bill. On this motion the yeas were 141, the
nays 103.

After the conference report was disposed of—

Mr. BLA.ND said : Now, Mr. Speaker, I desire to submit a privileged resolution.
I offer a resolution to take from the Speaker's table a Senate bill for immediate
consideration in the Houee. Inasmuch as the Journal of the House was corrected
-and approved

A Member. What bill?

Mr. BLAND. The bill H. R. 5381 with Senate amendments, what is known as
the silver bill.

It will be remembered that the House correrted and approved the Journal. This
bill came over from the Senate with certain amendments to it, and by the vote of
the House taken this morning it is shown that this bill is upon the Speaker's
table, and under Rule XXIV should be laid before the House for consideration.
I desire to offer a resolution to that effect.

Mr. BLAND Let this resolution be read.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman raises a question upon the resolution which
be sends to the desk. The Clerk will read the resolution, so that the House may
understand the question presented.

The Clerk read as follows :

"Resolved, That the Speaker lay before the House the bill No. 5081, directing the
purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes therefor, and for other
purposes, with Senate amendments, for consideration."

Mr. McKINLEY. I make the point of order that that is not now in order.

Mr. SPRINGER. Why not?

Mr. McKINLEY. First, I make the point of order that the motion is not a privi-
leged motion, and that under the rules of this House the only way to reach the
Speaker's table is under the order of morning business.

Mr. BLAND. This is the morning business and is the regular order of businees,
which I am demanding.

Considerable discussion followed the introduction of this resolu-
tion. Mr. Conger claimed that notwithstanding the adoption of the

123

Mills resolution to correct the Journal the bill was in his committee
:)ecause it had physical possession of it. Mr. Morrow, of Californiaj
replied as follows :

Now, the mere physical fact that the bill is in the hands of the gentleman from
Iowa, as chairman of the Committoe on Coinage, Weights and Measarep, haw
nothing whatever to do with thia question. Why, any mpmber of this House
aiay proceed to the desk and take therefrom any bill and take it to his desk and
look itover to ascertair what motion or order shall be made in regard to it. Butsach
s tiikinpr from the Speaker's table is not a reference by the Speaker. He may as-
sent to such takirg, but such action does not confer any jurisdiction over the bill
n 1 he hands of such a member. If the hill is therefore in tne hands of any member
vr committee it is there without authority of law and should be returned at once.

After nnicli discussion, the Speaker ruled that Mr. Bland's reso-
lution was not in order. Mr. Bland appealed from the decision of
the Chair. Mr. McKinler moved to lay the appeal on the table,
pending which Mr. Crisp mored that the House adjourn. The
House refused to adjourn by a vote of yeas 13, nays 228, but at 5
"clock took a recess, under the rules, for an evening session.

June 21, after the reading of the Journal, the Speaker stated
that the question was upon the motion to lay on the table the appeal
from the Speaker's ruling, upon which the yeas and nays had been
ordered. Mr. Bland proposed to withdraw the appeal. This was ob-
jected to. Mr. Bland then moved to reconsider the vote by which
the yeas and nays were ordered. The motion of Mr. Bland to recon-
sider was lost; yeas 92, nays 122. The question then recurred upon
the motion of Mr. McKinley to lay on the table the appeal from the
Speaker's ruling taken by Mr. Bland. On this motion the yeas were
146, the nays 45. The Speaker then ruled that the bill had been
properly referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Meas-
ures, and was with that committee. Mr. Bland appealed from this
decision of the Chair. Mr. McKinley moved to lay the appeal on
the table. Considerable discussion followed on the question of
the reference of the bill to the Committee on Coinage, Weights
and Measures, during which incidentally the silver question was dis-
cussed. Those in favor of the Senate bill argued in favor of the im-
mediate reference of the bill to the Committee of the Whole House so
that a vote could be had upon it ; those opposed to the bill as it came
from the Senate favored its reference to the Coinage Committee.

In this debate Mr. Bland said :

Now, the l^peaker has claimed that because the Senate amendments required
an appropriation for a different purpose from the House bill that necessarily sends
it to the Committee of the Whole. I do not think it follows at h11. The appro-
priation is the matter that is material. The Senate bill provides for free coinage ;
the House bill provides for the purchase of bullion. But the appropriation made
by the Senate bill, the language used, is identical with that of the House bill, and
so far as the purposes and the objects of the two appropriations are concerned it
is not material.

124

But, Mr. Speaker, I contend that this House alrpady has settled this question,
and it is too late now to raise that point. By the vote of this House striking from
the Journal the reference of this bill or the record of it,-thi8 House has determined
that that, bill is upon the Speaker's table now ; and it will not do to say that be-
cauee the House struck out of the record a reference that was null and void that
therefore the Speaker can now refer a bill, or the House by 6uch a proceeding as
this can refer it. The reference of the Speaker, accordins; to the voe of the
House, and it was based upon that — and tlie whole argument was based upon the
proposition that the Speaker had no jurisdiction over the subject-matter of that
bill to dispose of it in the way he did, and that his act was a nullity. * * *

Now, I say this master is already settled by a vote of this House. This bill is
now practically upon the Speaker's table, and if this reference and this decision
of the Speaker is voted down we have but one thing to do, and that is to go to
the Speaker's table and take this bill up and pass it, or else get a conference com-
mittee and have a conference between the House and the Senate and agree upon
some bill that maybe passed.

Mr. SPRINGER. I desire to call the attention of the House to the fact that
the Speaker is under a misapprehension with rfgard to the practice of the House
heretofore with reference to House bills with Senate amendments. The Speaker
stated to the House the day before yesterday that the reference of this bill, out
of the session of the House, to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures^
was not an unusual procedure, but was in the ordinary course of business. He
Eaid :

"In the regular course of business the officer of the House to whom the Speaker
has intrusted the clerical work of the reference of bills, the J ournal clerk, informed
the Speaker that upon his list of bills which were to be referred, under the rules,
to committees of the House, in the same manner as hundreds, and possibly thou-
sands, of bills have been referred heretofore, was the bill known a.s the bill for sil-
ver coinage which had come from the Senate, and the Chair was asked if he had
any particular direction to make in regard to it."

The Speaker further said :

" What, thtn, was the duty of the Speaker in regard to it? Obviously, to refer
it in the same manner in which hundreds and thousands of bills have been re-
ferred at this session.

Now, I was led to believe from that ftatement that hundreds and thousands of
bills in the same parliamentary situation as this bill had been so referred by the
Speaker during this session of Congress, but I have taken the pains, in two hours'
time this morning, to examine every page of the Congressional Record where such
references appear, and I say here now, and this Record will prove it, that the sil-
ver bill is the only bill of this kind that has been so referred. [A.pplause on the
Democratic side.]

Mr. PETERS. The gentleman from Illinois will remember that every appro-
priation bill that comes back from the Senate with amendments is referred to the
Committee on Appropriations in the same way.

Mr. SPRINGER. I deny it; I deny it; and I challenge the gentleman from
Kansas, and I challenge the Speaker to point to the Congressional Record of thi»
House which shows a single case in which a House bill with a Senate amendment
has been referred to a standing committee of this House by the Speaker without
calling the attention of the House to it. Now, I stand upon the Recot'd and I chal-
lenge any gentleman to produce any evidence to the contrary of what I have
stated. The Speaker made that statement in order to influence the judgment of
this House at the very time his action in referring this bill was under considera-
tion and when no answer could be made to it. [Applause on the Democratic side.]
****«■* •)(•*

This is a House bill with Senate amendments to it ; and I reassert the fiu;t that
no other bill of this kind has ever been referred by the Speaker of this House to
a standing committee, so far as appears in our proceedings, as recorded in the Con-
gresssional Record.

Mr. CRISP. As I intend, Mr. Speaker, to vote to sustain the appeal from the
decision of the Chair, I desire to say a word or two respecting the reasons whish
influence my vote.

As the Speaker has often stated, the rules of the Hoase are a growth. They
come from experience and practice. Very often the impression the individoat

125

Representative has as to what ought to be done under a given rale, as it stands in
our code, is inconsistent with the usage and practice of the Hoiise under such rule.

I can cite members to many instances of this. Under the old rules the Speaker
was expressly forbidden after the second roll-call to r^•cognize a gentleman to ask
nnanimous consent to cafit his vote; and yet for very many years, n-^twithsiand-
ing that express rule, the practice of the Speaker, assented to by the House, was
wherever a gentleman stated that he was in his seat during the roll-call and had
not voted , to permit him to vote. The rule seemed plain and unequivocal, and
yt't the practice under it was essentially different frooa the rule itself.

Now, take the rule under which the' Speaker referred this bill. Whatever my
impression or your impression may be as to the meaning of the rule, standing
alone, when we c >me to vote on its construction we must vote in the light of the
decisions heretofore made upon it and the practice of ihe House under it. I have
referred the House on a previous occasion to the decision «<f the present Speaker
made when a point of order was raised that the House bill for the condemnation
of land in the District of Columbia for a post-office building, which hal been
amended in the Senate so as to maks it carrv an appropriation, was not snch a bill
as, under the mies and practice of the Housi^, could bf taken from the Speaker's
table and laid before the H ju-,e for consideration ; the Speaker distinctly decided
that it was his duty to submit the bill to the House for its action.

The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. Springer] has shown you that during this
whole session of Congress the silver bill is the first Housh bill with a Senate amend-
ment which ha" been privately referred. Why, Mr. Speaker, on the bill involving
the question of coinage of silver, should we depart from what has been the usage
and practice of the House? What is there peculiar in legislation respecting silver
which seems to make a certain party in this House and country so anxious to do
secretly that which they do in regard to it? We are told, and we believe it, that
the demonetization of silver was a secret proceps ; that it was done without full
notice. It was done when the people were not aware of what was being done.

Here we have a repetition of those tactics. Here we find a Hoas« bill coming
from the Senate with an amendment providing for the free coinage of silver. Here
you find that as to that bill, the ordinary course of parliamentary procedure in
respect to such matters is not followed, but a new and different practice obtains.
The bill is not laid before the House, but id secretly referred to a committee. We
are not permitted to consider the legislation proposed by the Senate; we are not
permitted to have a direct vote upon the Senate amendment.

Mr. TOWN SEND, of Colorado. Mr. Speaker, I will not attempt to say any-
thing that would throw anv light with reference to the quest i-m of the rule.
Many gentlemen are better fit to disfu-js that matter thnn I am, but I say this: It
does seem to me that this question, if it is not, ought to be res adjudicata, so far as
the present action is proposed. Now, sir, if I did not believe that this w-is the only
way to the consideration of the free coinage of silver, I might cast a diffnrent vote
from what I have cast, and I know, and gentlemen on this floor know, how, when
this bill was before the House for consideration in the first instance, there was no
opportunity or permission given to ofier any amendment except such as was at
the disposal of th'S Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures ; and if this
bill should go to that committf*e, we have no reason to believe that this House
will ever be permitted to ca-t a vote for the free coinage of silver.

Now, Mr. Speaker, the people whom I have the honor to represent upon this
floor are for the free coinage of silver, everv man, woman, and child of every
party in that State ; and diH I not vote for an opportunity to get consideration of
that question I would be unfaithful to the people whom I represent upon this
floor. [Applause.] They look upon the demonetization of silver as the most in-
famous crime that ever was perpetrated upon a producing people of this country
and upon the people of this world. [Applause] They desire to have that re-
versed. We simply want to get the mater up here so that we can reverse it, if
the majority of this House sees fit to do so. I believ« it is wise, and I believe It
is the thine to do, and so believing, and so being practically instructed by my
people, I shall vote in every way I can to get to the consideration of this bill.
[Applause.]

Mr. MORROW. Mr. Speaker, when the present Congress assembled it was
eonfronted with the complaint that in preceding Congresses public business had
Bot been transacted as the people of the country desired and expected. Durijig

126

the last year the subject was a matter of discussion amonpj the people, and in the
leading magazines in the country by the leaders of both parties. The people de-
manded, very properly, that there should be soms modification of the rules of this
House in order that" legislation should be expedited, and that the business of
the House might be transacted. There w«re many difficulties in the way. Some
of them have not been and may never be removed.

The Committee on Rales reported certain modification of the rules of the
former Congress, and among the modifications was an amandtnent or amend-
mentfj to Rule XXIV of the preceding Congress. This is ttie rule that relates to
the order ol business, and as amended it provides for the immediate consideration
of busmess coming on to the Speaker's table from the Senate.

* >|c * « 4> * *

Mr. Speaker, I desire to call your attention to this provision that follows :
'' Senate bills, substantially the same as House bills, already favorably reported
by a committee of the House, and not required to be considered in Committee of
the Whole, may also be disposed of in the same manner on motion directed to be
made by such Committee."

Now, this last provision was a new method of procedure adopted for the con-
sideration of Senate bills. It was for the purpose of enabling committees to take
from the Speaker's table a bill from the Sanate when substantially the same bill
had been reported by a House committee for the consideration of the House
Unquestionably this facilitated business, because it did away with the necessity
of referrins^ the Senate bill to a committee, and probably in the end sending it to
the foot of the House Calendar. So it has happened during the present ses <ion of
this House that many Senate bills have become laws which under the old rules
would to day be at the foot of the Calendar, and these laws owe their existence
on the statute-book to the very fact that under this rule they have been taken
from the Speaker's table and passed because of the privilege of immediate con-
sideration provided for by this rule.

*♦***»*

Now the same reason for immediate consideration obtains where a bill baa
passed the House and has been amended and passed the Senate. It has progressed
to a point where the prompt dispatch of business requires that it should be taken
from the Speaker's table and laid before the House for immediate action.

Now, assuming that the amendments to the bill under consideration render the
bill subjk^ct to the point of order, what is to be done with the bill ? It is on the
Speaker's table. It should be laid before the House, and if the point of order is
made it mu3t be considered bv the Committee of the Whole House, and I submit
that a motion would then be in order for the House to resolve itself into the Com-
mittee of the Whole House for the purpose of considering the bill.

Mr. HERMANN. Mr. Speaker, it is a matter of most profound regret to me to
disagree with a large proportion of my associates upon this side of the Chamber,,
and I feel that it is incumbent upon me to state to the House and to the country
the position in which I am situated with regard to this question. I am here as a
Representative of the people of Oregon, and as such I feel it to be my boundea
duty and obligation to represent those people to the very best of my ability and
according to tbeir wishes and their interest.

But recently, within four weeks, thii question with othera was made an issue
before the people of Oregon m an election. Both parties went before them with
substantially the same platform. I stood upon the platform of the Republican
party and indorsed the sentiments it contained. I aereed to abide by the wishes
of the party as set forth in that platform, and I engaged that after I was elected
as a Representative to Congress from that State I would endeavor to carry out
those wwhes as the wishes of the whole people to the best of my ability.

In order that my associates upon this side, particularly, may understand the-
pledge which I have made to those people, and the sentiments which they have
expressed on this question, indeed I may say the instructions which they have
given me to execute, I will take the liberty of reading from the platform of the Re-
publican party of Oregon.

"6. That, recognizing the fact that the United States is the greatest silver- pro-
ducing country in the world, and that both gold and silver were equally the money
of the Constitution from the beginning of the Republic until the hostile legisla-
tion against silver which unduly contracted the circulating medium of the country ,
and recognizing that the great interests of the people demanded more money for

127

use in the channels of trade and commerce, therefore we declare ourselves in
favor of the free and unlimited coinage of silver and denounce any attempt to
discriminate against silver as unwise and unjust."

Mr. Speaker, those are my " sailing orders," and I feel it my duty as a conscien
tious Representative, upon all questions and upon all motions in w/)ich the sub-
ject may be involved, to obey those instructions to the best of my ability. I pro-
pose to stand or fall by them.

Mr. CARTER. Mr.' Speaker, the action of this House on j'epterday, from mv
point of view, was but the exercise of the supreme right of the House, recognized
by the Speaker himself, to control the business of the House. The opinion has^
been expressed by parliamentarians on both sides of this Chamber that the refer-
ence of the bill to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures was an au-
thorized act, and the defeat of the preamble to the resolution of the gentleman
from Texas emphasized that view. But, independent of the reference, regardless
of the right to make it, stood the supreme right of the House not only to undo that
which the Saeaker, as the authorized organ of the House, bad done, but to undo-
that which the House itself might have done the day preceding.

I propose to consistently support the votes cast by me upon yesterday, and that
position I will maintain for the reason that I believe such course to be the most
direct and business-like way of reaching and disposing of the momentous question
in hand. It would be entirely proper to refer this bill to the Committee on Coin-
age, Weights and Measures. Who can assert that it is not equally proper for the
House to hold the bill and act upon it without the intervention of that committee ?
Does the assertion of this supreme right by the House imply reflection upon any
member or any officer of the House? Not at all. So believing, I propose to com-
bine with those who hold similar sentiments to my own in asserting the right of
the House to dispose of its own business in its own way. That right no gentleman
in this body recognizes more clearly than the eminent Speaker who presides over
the deliberations of the House. We can dispose of this bill to-day with as much
intelligence as we can bring to bear upon it at any other time.

Mr. BARTINE. I suppose that every member of this House is perfectly aware
of the fact that every gentleman upon this floor who represents a silver-pro:^ ucing
constituency represents one, every individual of which is in favor of the free coinasre
of silver. For that reason gentlemen representing those States do not approach
this question in a purely technical spirit. We are all of us new members of this
House. We do not claim to be great parliamentflrians, and for that reason we have
not undertaken to disc"ss the refinements of parliamentary law, which have been
presented durinar the course of this debate ; but there is one thing which, as a mat-
ter of plain common sense, I wish to suggest. While I do not claim to understand
parliamentary law, I do claim to understand p'ain, simple, < ommonplace Ecgli'-h
when it is presented to my gaze. The rule under which we are acting, and under
which it is proposed to act, makes the statement that when a House bill is returned
with a Senate amendment it may be considered and disposed of by the House^
unless it requires consideration in a Committee of the Whole.

Now, I do not see how an exception requiring the consideration of a bill in a
Committee of the Whole requires its consideration by the Committee on Coinage,
Weights and Measures. The little that I know about law amounts to just this,
that when a thing is expressly mentioned in a statute, everything e^se that is not
mentioned is excluded, and when this rule says that a bill of this kind may require
consideration in a Committee of the Whole, it carries with it the necessary impli-
cation that that consideration must be in a Committee of the Whole and not any-
where else; and sending the bill to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Meas-
ures does not even tend to get it into a Committee of the Whole.

Now, then, aside from all technicalities, I regard the great question involved in
this contest as being simply this: Shall we have the opporLunity of voting fairly
and squarely upon the question of free coinage?

Mr. CLEMENTS. Mr. Speaker, this ought not to be a political or partisan ques-
tion, and I shall not discuss it as such. It appears to me, however, to be an ap-
peal on the part of the Speaker from the decision of the House which was ren-
dered yesterday. The House, after voting down numerous dilatory motions, de-
cided at last to erase from the Journal the declaration that this bill had been sent
to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures. If the Speaker has the
power this morning in open House to send it there, he had the power to do it
privately the other day when he attemplied to do so.

128

This is simply a question as to whether or not the Representatives of the people
shall have the right to execute the will of the people ; and I want to say to the
friends of free coinage of silver on either side of the House this word of warning:
If you pass this station the probability is you will r^ot have another opportu-
nity to vote on the question of free coinage of eilver upon this bill. I say this in
the light of the history o^ the proceedings on this bill in tht- House before it went
to the Senate and the proceedings riere during the last two day:?.

Now, certainly the condition of this country ia such— and a majority of the peo-
ple recognize that condition to be such — that there ought to be a large increase of
the circulating medium in order to respond to the demands of the growing busi-
ness and trade of the country, and to relieve the present depression. Here is a
direct opportunity, if the representatives of the people decide to avail themselves
of it, to vote to execute that will ; and no technical reason ought to stand between
the Representatives of the people and a direct vote on this question.

Mr. Fitch expressed the views of certain anti-silver Democrats as

follows :

Mr. FITCH. Mr. Speaker, I have been one of those nho for a couple of days
past have insisted that this bill should not be sent to a committee by the Speaker
without an opportunity for the House to appeal from his decision and to debate
that bill and vote upon it ; and I have rejiiced with my other friends that there
are Republicans on the other side who are willing to take that view of the subject
and go along with us to the success which we achieved in connection with the
matter on yesterday. But to- day, Mr. Speaker, it is claimed on both sides of the
House thnt this is a victory for free coinaffe, and those of us who do not believe in
free coinage are called upon to go on with this crusade, ns my distinguished friend
has said, to have immediate consideration for the silver bill and its final passage
under the previous question.

Mr. BLAND. Oh, no; we want consideration only.

Mr. FI rCH. When it comes to that point my friend from Montana [Mr. Cabter]
says that he, combined with those on this side of the House who agree with him,
can secure it. Now, Mr. Speaker, he can not combine with me on that branch of
the silver question. [Laughter.] So far as lam concerned, I will vote to send
this bill to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, on which there are
diatinguished Democrats, in which committee it can oe fully considered, so that
we may have a full, fair, and open discussion of the subject. Then when it comes
back to the House, if there is a majority on both sides of the House who are will-
ing to go to the extreme length which my people at least do not approve, then it
will have been at all events considered in order under the rules, and those who
believe as I do upon the subject will not be held responsible.

For the gentleman from Georgia no one has more admiration or higher respect
— I refer to the gentleman from Georgia, Mr. Crisp — than I have. But the gentle-
man made a little mistake to day when he said that some Republicans, combined
with all the Democrats of the House, had voted in favor of this subject of free

coinage.

*******

Mr. CANNON. Mr. Speaker, I am for the consideration of this bill; I am for
the enactment of silver legislation. There is no man on the floor of this House
that more heartily desires the use of both metals for money than I do. But ia
treating of this question, and in legislating about it, I propose, so far as my vote
goes, to proceed in an orderly way by the aid of a majority of the House, under
the rules of the House to consider, to determine, to legislate.

On the question of appeal made by Mr. Bland, Mr. McCreary said :

Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of the resolution offered by the gentleman from.
Missouri [VIr. Bland], which requests the Speaker to lay before the House the bill
5381 with the amendments of the Senate thereto. But before action can be had
upon that resolution the point of order raised by the gentleman from Iowa [Mr.
Conger] must be decided.

Responding in the beginning of my remarks to the gentleman from Iowa [Mr.
Conger], who says that this bill as early as 11 o'clock on yesterday was sent to
the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, of which he is chairman, and

129

receipted for by him or by hie clerk, I wish to say that under the Constitution of
the United States, if we have proper respect for that instrument, that bill should
not have been sent to that committee at that time. There was no warrant of au-
thority to send it to that committee, and he had no right to receipt for it.

The Constitution of the United States provides, in section 5, Article I, that
" each House shall keep a journal of its proceedings," and the Journal which con-
tained the Speaker's order referring the bill in regard to "the purchase of silver
bullion and the iesue of Treasury notes thereon " to the Committee on Coinage,
Weights and Measures had not been approved by the House at that time, and
therefore it v^as not proper to send the bill then to that committee. The Journal
containing the order referred to wa<3 not approved until to-day, and before it was
aoproved the order of the Speaker re/erring the bill to the Committee on Coinage,
Wtjights and Measures was under a resolution adopted by this House ordered to
be stricken out.

Mr. Speaker, if each House is required by the Constitution to keep a journal of
its proceedings, it is clear that until the Journal was approved by the House the
Clerk of this House had no right, and no person had authority to take House bill
5381 from the Speaker's table to the committee-room or elsewhere, and the gentle-
man from Iowa had no right to receipt for it, and if he did receipt for it, his action
was absolutely void.

Mr. PERKINS. Mr. Speaker, I do not consider the pending appeal from the
decision of the Chair a question as to whether we shall have free coinage or some-
thing less than that, or whether we shall have legislation upon this important sub-
ject or not. In my judgment the question that we ai*e called to consider and de-
termine now is one whether, according to the rules of this House, we will have an
orderly and methodical consideration of business, and thoughtful and patriotic
legislation, or whether, without consideration, without deliberation, and in viola-
tion of the rules, there shall be forced through this House a measure honestly
believed in by many, but forced through under circumstances that if possible will
induce an Executive veto when presented to the President of the United States
for his consideration.

I know many gentlemen upon the other side of this House personally, and I
know them as individuals to be reputable and deserving gentlemen, but they
deem that their allegiance is to the Democracy of the United States, and collect-
ively, in my judgment, they would wreck the business interests of this country, if
by doing so they could advance the interests of the Democratic party. [Applause
on the Republican side.] To-day, yesterday, and the day before we saw them
unitedly contending for the position thev assumed, not in the interests of free
coinage, not in the interest of wise legislation, and not to secure the passage of a
bill that would give us free and unlimited coinage of silver, but to force through
this House a measure under circumstances that if possible would compel the Execu-
tive of this nation to veto it, because it did not secure the sanction of a deliberative
body. [Derisive jeers on the Democratic side.]

Mr. CONNELL. Mr. Speaker, like my friend from Nevada [ Mr. Bartine] I am
a new member, from the wild and woolly West. I am free to admit that I have
only a limited knowledge regarding national legislation. I confess I am inexpe-
rienced so far as the rules and practice of this House are concerned.

It may be that it is due to such limited knowledge and inexperience that I am
unable to understand the position of Republican members about me who declare
in favor of free coinage and vote in the opposite direction. There is much regard-
ing the rules and procedure of this House which I do not understand.

But I do not propose, in the brief space of two minutes which has been yielded
to me, to undertake to tell all I do not know, as that would be impossible. I do
wish, however, to refer to one thing I can not understand, and that is, why this
is made a political question, I can not see why a line should be drawn from the
Speaker's desk through the center of this Hall, dividing Democrat-s and Repub-
licans. I deny that this is a political question. It is above and beyond that, and
if you wait until the roll is called you will hear members on the other side voting
according to their convictions, not their political convictions, but according to their
belief on this question of free coinage.

Then, why, on this side, should not members who are in favor of free and un-
limited coinage of silver vote according to their convictions, vote as representa-

130

tives of the people who sent them here? Why do not the Western members,
who know the sentiment of the West, stand up like men and vote according to
their convictions, and vote according to the speeches they have been delivering
here in this House? Now, Mr. Speaker, there is one other thing I do not under-
stand, and that is why those who favored limited debate when the silver bill was
originally discussed, are now pleading for time for its further consideration. If not
for the purpose of "burying" the bill, it must be to suspend it, like Mohammed's
coffin, " between high heaven and earth." I am in favor of meeting all questions
arising under the amendments proposed by the Senate right here and now.

Mr. SPRINGER. It is in violation of order to make a threat of an executive
veto against any measure ; and I want to make that point against the remarks of
the gentleman from Kansas. [Applause on the Democratic side.]

Mr. HENDERSON, of Iowa. I say that the bill of the House amended by the
Senate, with the judgment of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures,
will be reported back to this House for action, and I expect to see a bill passed
that will provide for consuming the entire product of the silver mines of this
country. In spite of your Democratic opposition, I expect to see such a bill
enacted into law with the sanction of a Republican President before this Congress
adjourns. [Applause on the Republican side.]

Mr. CUTCHEON. Mr. Speaker, it seems to me that the issue presented to us
this morning is very simple, clear-cut, and well defined. It is not whether we are
in favor of the free coinage of silver ; it is not whether we are in favor of the
Senate amendments to the House bill ; but the sole and only question is whether
the Speaker of this House has acted in accordance with the rules of this House in
the reference of this bill to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures.

Now, I desire to corroborate the statement of my friend from Iowa [Mr. Hen-
derson] in regard to the practice of the House. It happens that two important
bills, both appropriation bills, have been reported from the Committee on Military
AflEairs, with which I am connected, have gone from the House to the Senate,
have been there amended and returned to the House with the Senate amend-
ments, and have been referred to the Committee on Military Affairs, precisely as
this bill was referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures.

Mr. CONGER. Mr. Speaker, the question before the House at this time is not
whether we shall have free coinage or shall not have free coinage, but it is a
question of parliamentary procedure under the rules of this House. The Speaker
has referred a bill to the proper committee of this House under the rules, and the
question is whether he shall be sustained in that proper reference.

No question of equal magnitude with the measure that has been sent over to us
from the Senate was ever acted on in this House without deliberate consideration by
some committee of the House. Why, gentlemen, the bill sent over here from the
Senate is not simply a free coinage bill. There are matters in that bill which have
never yet been discussed in either branch of this Congress.

Why, sir, this bill goes infinitely beyond the free coinage of silver. It not only
proposes to coin all the silver that may be brought to our mints from anywhere in
the world free of expense to the holder, but it also provides and advertises the
fact to the world that any men who can by any accumulation of capital control
the purchase of silver bullion anywhere in the worid may bring it immediately to
our mints and be paid for in legal-tender money of the United States, at a price
30 per cent, above its market value, and fixed and guarantied by the Government.
Gentlemen, I say there are not three districts in the United States outside of the
silver- producing States that are in favor of such a proposition as that ; and the
people of this country outside of those districts wonld not indorse such a proposi-
tion for a single moment if they understood it. Now, gentlemen, such a measure
as this does deserve deliberate consideration. It did not have it in the other branch
of Congress.

We have already commented on the absurd daim of" the chairman
of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures as to profits on
bullion under free coinage. The statement of one who has evinced so
little knowledge himself of the money question, that the bill which

131

passed the Senate did not have proper consideration in that body is
calculated to elicit a smile from those who are able to compare the
chairman of the House committee with Senators who have gained
world-wide reputations for their knowledge of the money question,
or to compare the entire discussion of the question in the Senate
witb that in the House. What Mr, Conger here says shows that he
has done little thinking, or very poor thinkings on the subject of
which his committee has charge. Indeed it is difficult to,understand
how one who had ordinary capacity would commit himself publicly
to a statement as absurd as that above quoted.

The debate throughout showed that the question of reference
was not separated, in the minds of members, from the probable out-
come of a reference to the Coinage Committee.

The motion was stated by the Speaker, as follows :

The SPEAKER. The question is upon the motion of the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. McKinley]. The Chair has announced to the House that he refers the bill
to the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, and that the Chair does so
under the rules of the House for the reasons given. The gentleman from Mis-
souri [Mr. Bland] appeals from the decision of the Chair, and the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. McKinley] moves to lay that appeal upon the table.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and it was decided in the affirmative — yea8jl44,nay8
117, not voting 66 ; as follows :

YEAS— 144.

Adams,

Cheadle,

Henderson, 111. Mudd,

Allen, Mich.

Cogswell,

Henderson, la

Mutchler,

Anderson, Kans.

Comstock,

Hill,

Niedringhaus,

Arnold,

Conger,

Hitt,

O'Donnell,

Atkinson, W. Va.

Culbertson, Pa

. Kennedy,

O'Neil, Mass.

Baker,

Cutcheon,

Kerr, Iowa,

O'Neill, Pa.

Banks,

Dalzell,

Ketcham,

Osborne,

Bayne,

Dargan,

Kinsey,

Owen, Ind.

Beckwith,

Darlington,

Knapp,

Payne,

Belden,

De Lano,

Lacey,

Payson,

Belknap,

Dolliver,

La Follette,

Perkins,

Bergen,

Bunnell,

Laidlaw,

Peters,

Bingham,

Dunphy,

Laws,

Pickler,

Bliss,

Evans,

Lehlbach,

Post,

Boothman,

Ewart,

Lind,

Pugsley,

Boutelle,

Farquhar,

Lodge,

Quinn,

Bowden,

Finley,

Maish,

Raines,

Brewer,

Fitch,

McAdoo,

Randall,

Brosius,

Flick,

McComas,

Reed, Iowa,

Browne, Va

Flood,

McCormick,

Reyburn,

Buchanan, N. J.

Frank,

McKenna,

Rife,

Buckalew,

Gear,

McKinley,

Rockwell,

Burrows,

Geisaenbainer

Miles,

Rowell,

Burton,

Geet,

Milliken,

RUS3*^11,

Bntterworth,

Giflford,

Moffitt,

Sanford,

Caldwell,

Greenhalge,

Moore, N. H.

Sawyer,

Candler, MafS.

Grosvenor,

Morey,

Scull,

Cannon,

Hanfibrough,

Morrill,

Sherman,

Caswell,

Haugen,

Morse,

Smith, 111.

Smith, W. Va.

Smyser,

Snider,

Spooner,

Stahlnecker,

Stephenson,

Stivers,

Stockbridge,

Struble,

Sweney,

Taylor, E. B.

Taylor, J. D.

Thomas,

Tracey,

Turner, Kans.

Vandever,

Van Schaick,

Waddill,

Walker, Mass.

Wallace, Mass.

Wallace, N. Y.

Watson,

Wickham,

Wiley,

Williams, Ohio,

Wilson, Ky.

Wright,

Yardley.

132

NAYS— 117.

•Abbott,

Clarke, Ala.

Gibson,

McClellan,

Springer,

Alderson,

Clements,

Goodnight,'

McCreary,

Stewart, Ga.

Anderson, Miss.

Clunie,

Grimes,

McMillin,

Stewart, Tex.

Bankhead,

Cobb,

Hare,

McRae,

Stone, Ky.

Barnes,

Connell,

Hayes,

Mills,

Stone, Mo.

Bartine,

Cooper, Ind.

Haynes,

Montgomery,

Stump,

Blanchard,

Cothran,

Heard,

Moore, Tex.

Tarsney,

Bland,

Cowles,

Hemphill,

Morrow,

Tillman,

Boatner,

Crain,

Henderson,N,C.Norton,

Townsend,Colo.

Breckinridge,Ark. Crisp,

Herbert,

O'Neall, Ind.

Tucker,

Breckinridge, Ky.

, Culberson.Tex

. Hermann,

Owens, Ohio,

Turner, Ga.

Brickner,

Cummings,

Holman,

Parrett,

Venable,

Brookshire,

Davidson,

Kelley,

Paynter,

Wade,

Brown, J. B.

De Haven,

Kilgore,

Peel,

Wheeler, Ala,

Brunner,

Dockery,

Lane,

Penington,

Whiting,

Buchanan, Va.

Edmunds,

Lanham,

Perry,

Wike,

Bullock,

Elliott,

L8e,

Reilly,

Wilkinson,

Bunn,

Ellis,

Lester, Ga.

Richardson,

Williams, 111.

Bynum,

Enloe,

Lester, Va.

Robertson,

Wilson, Mo.

Carlton,

Fithian,

Lewis,

Rowland,

Wilson, W.Va.

Carter,

Forman,

Magner,

Sayers,

Yoder.

Caruth,

Forney,

Mansur,

Shively,

Catchings,

Fowler,

Martin, Ind.

Skinner,

Chipman,

Funston,

McClammy,

Spinola,

So the appeal was laid on the table. ,

Thus ended the struggle in the House over the free coinage bill
which had passed the Senate by a majority of 17.

The Senate Bill Reported to the House.
The Senate bill came up again in the House June 24th, as follows :

Mr. McKINLEY. I am instructed by the Committee on Rules to make the fol-
lowing report and ask immediate action thereon.

The Clerk read as follows :

The Committee on Rules, to whom was referred the accompanying resolution
of the House relating to a time for the consideration of House bill No. 5381 (the
silver bill), have considered the same, and beg leave to report the following sub-
stitute :

"Resolved. That immediately after the passage of this resolution the House pro-
ceed to consider House bill No. 5381 with Senate aoaendments, and at 2 o'clock
Wednesday, June 25, 1890, the previous question be considered as ordered."

Upon this the previous question was ordered, twenty minutes, de-
bate on a side being allowed. A few extracts from this debate are
here given :

Mr. McMILLIN. Mr. Speaker, ray colleague and I on the committee were not
able to concur in this resolution for the reason that we thought the time had come
when there ought to be some opportunity of unrestricted consideration of a meas-
ure 60 important as the silver bill. The House will remember that when it was
considered before it was under a special rule, which took it out of the Committee
of the Whole, which limited beforehand the time when debate should cease,
which limited in the beginning the time when amendments should any longer be
in order, and which had the effect, whether intended or not, of preventing amend-
ment.

In that way it was put through the House. It was passed without amendments
or without opportunity to amend, which ought to be the right of the House, am
went to the Senate. It is disclosing no secret to say that gentlemen who vote(

133

for it did so under protest ; did so, stating; to the House that they would not sup-
port it but for the fact that the Senate would have a chance for deliberate consider-
ation and amendment.

It went to the Senate ; it was amended there ; it came back to this House, and
the proceedings by which it was referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights
and Measures is a part of the history of this House. That committee, I under-
stand, have reported it back this morning. Now, before even their report is
printed, before it has been read, before it has been considered for one moment, it
is proposed to apply a new iron-bound rule, and to again cut ofl the right of
amendment, and to again cut off the right of debate.

Mr. BLAND. A parliamentary inquiry, Mr. Speaker. Do I understand, under
this rule, that the vote to be taken to-morrow, in the regular order, would be, first,
to concur in the Senate amendments, and then to non-concur and aak for a com-
mittee of conference ? If I understand the parliamentary situation, that is the
way ; and that is what I desire to know.

The SPEAKER. That will be the case. Provided a motion to concur should
be made, that would have precedence ; but that might be open to amendment.

Mr. BLAND. I want to give notice tbati desire to move to concur in the Senate
amendments.

So far as I am concerned, Mr. Speaker, the bill as amended by the Senate is en-
tirely satisfactory to me, and I am ready to vote upon it to-day or to morrow, when-
ever the House sees proper.

Mr. BLOUNT. Mr. Speaker, so far as I am concerned the only difficulty we have
about this matter is a right which I think has been restricted without reason on
several occasions — the right of considering Senate amendments, which, under the
rules have to go to the Committee of the Whole — the right to exercise that priv-
ilege.

Now, it is well known, sir, that only a few days ago, on this very silver bill, there
was a restraint on the part of the majority of this House by reason of an order
made and agreed to in advance of debate. There was a restraint on the rights of
the majority of this House to do what it wanted to do There were three days af-
terwards wasted on a parliamentary question, fought with intense eamestnees, be-
cause the majority of this House believed it had been wronged on this question.
*******

In the debate on the silver bill previously had, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
Cannon] and the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. McKinley], when I stated that there
would be no ri^ht to vote on the question of free coinage, that there would be four
amendments offered, all coming from the other side and all following one line of
thought, responded : " Why, you have all the rights you have under the rules of
the House." Well we did have all the rights we had under the rules of the House
as the rules were administered, and when we had it, with all its seeming fairness,
with all the demand there was for the free coinage of silver in this country, we
never had an opportunity to vote upon free coinage. The digciplinary process has
been steadilj' going on in Republican caucuses, in Republican councils, and in the
Republican Committee on Rules, to prevent such a vote.

Mr. McKINLEY. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this resolution must be manifest
to both sides of the Chamber. It is that we may have some definite and speedy
action touching the subject of silver, and give to the country a larger use of silver
as a circulating medium and do it at once, and I am very much surprised to find
gentlemen on the other side of the House to-day engaged in opposition to this bill
who, three or four days ago, were insisting that this question should not go to the
Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, but should be considered im-
mediately in open House, because, as ibey said, they and the country were ready
to vote upon it. They said in that debate, Mr. Speaker, that the purpose of this
side of the House was to smother the silver bill, to send it to the Committee on
Coinage, Weights and Measures, where it would sleep during the remainder of this
session, and that we should have no silver legislation at all.

Mr. Speaker, if It is practical legislation we are after — if it is the desire to coin
every dollar of the silver product of the United States, and make the Treasury
notes issued in payment for that bullion a legal tender for debts, pubUc and pri-
vate, redeemable in coin — if that is what the people of this coimtry want, they
can have it by a vote concurring in the recommendation of the Committee on
Coinage, Weights and Measures to non-concur in the Senate amendments and
have a committee of conference.

134

We are confronted face to face with the practical question whether we shall
have free and unlimited coinage of the world's silver product, before any inter-
national arrangement for the monetary use of silver is made, or whether we shall
have legislation that will absorb every ounce of silver produced in the United
States and make it a part of our monetary system, and accepsible to the business
uses of the country, and yet not interfere with future international arrangements.
That, Mr. Speaker, is what is involved in the report this morning.

The rule was adopted, and Mr. Conger, chairman of the commit-
tee having charge of the hill, submitted the report of the committee
on the bill, which is as follows :

The Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, to whom was referred House
bill No. 5381, directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Trraf^ury
notes thereon, and for other purposes, with various Senate amendments, having
given the same due consideration, report the same back to theHouse with a recom-
mendation that the House non-concur in each and all of said amendments and re-
quest a conference on the same.

Thus, the bill which the chairman of the House Coinage Commit-
tee said had not been duly considered by the Senate, was immediately
reported back as having had "due consideration " at the hands of
the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, the result of
which was the predetermined recommendation that the bill be sent to
a conference committee 1 On reporting back the bill, Mr. Conger said •

Now, Mr. Speaker, I move that the House non-concur in the Senate amend-
ments and request a conference. I desire to say, Mr. Speaker

Mr. BLAND. I desire to move to concur with the Senate amendments. I wish
to have that motion pending.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Congee] moves that the
House non-concur in the Senate amendments and ask for a committee of confer-
ence. Pending that the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. Bland] moves that the
House concur in the Senate amendments.

Mr. McMILLIN. I presume we shall be entitled to a division of the question.
There are a number of amendments.

The SPEAKER. The amendments will have to be voted on separately, if de-
manded.

Mr. BLOUNT. They are all pending?

The SPEAKER. They are all pending.

Mr. BLOUNT. So that we shall get a vote on both questions.

The SPEAKER. If the motion to concur is negatived

Mr. BLOUNT. That is the first vote ?

The SPEAKER. If that motion is negatived it is equivalent to a vote to non-concur.

Mr. BLOUNT. That will be the first question submitted ?

The SPEAKER. That will be the first question submitted — the question on
concurrence.

Mr. SPRINGER. That will be at 2 o'clock to-morrow.

Mr. McCREARY. I rise to a parliamentary inquiry. Does the motion to con-
cur apply to all the Senate amendments on the first vote?

The SPEAKER. The motion covers all the amendments, but any member will
have the ri^ht to demand a separate vote.

Mr. CONGER. Mr. Speaker, I came to the beginning of this Congress fully im-
pressed with the necessity of some legislation upon this important question which
we have under discussion before us to-day, and I believe I can safely speak for a
majority of the members of this side of the House when I say that they came
here fully impressed with the same spirit and belief. To that end the committee
over which I have the honor to preside have continually and patiently labored.

We gave to the matter before any report was made to the House the fullest pos-
sible consideration. We listened to the statements and arguments of every mem-
ber and of every man who desired to appear before the committee. We had first
before us a committee representing the National Silver Convention that met in St.
Louis last fall. General A. J. Warner, of Ohio, came here to represent and speak

135

for that convention, and he came with full authority as expressing the wishes and
the views of the convention. We listened to Mr. Warner, we took his suggestions,
and we found that upon the date of his appearance before our committee he was
practically in accord with the bill which was afterwards reported by that committee
and placed upon the Calendar of this Houee. He indorsed and advocated the com-
mercial instead of the coining ratio between gold and silver, and also the princi-
ple of bullion redemption, which are the main features of the House bill. And I
understand, Mr. Speaker, if he does not still believe in the principles which were
acted upon by the committee in the adoption of that bill, there certainly has come a
great change over the spirit of his dream, as well as that of the great crowd of
silver men for whom he spoke.

Now, Mr. Speaker, following in that line we reported that bill to the House.
We reported a bill which we believed was for the beet interests of the whole peo-
ple of this country — not simply for the bullion owners, not simply for the holders
of capital, but for the interest of every man, woman, and child in this country, for
there is nothing upon which the prosperity of a community or a country depends
so much as upon safe and judicious financial legislation. For that reason, and eo
believing, while we were all in favor of the additional and enlarged use of silver as
money in this country, we tried to find some method in which that enlargement
and that additional use could come about without creating great or disastrous fi-
nancial disturbance. We believed we had arrived at a proper and safe conclusion
in that respect when we reported the House bill, and have seen nothing to change
that conviction. We still believe it.

I speak for myself when I say that the action of the United States Senate has
not changed my views upon this question in the least. Why, Mr. Speaker, the
Senators did not discuss the bill that they sent over to us, and they do not want
the bill passed. Many of them are ashamed of the legislation which they enacted
and sent over here, and they have acknowledged it.

The silver committee can not speak for the Senate, or for Senators,

but comparing the discussion on the subject In the two Houses no one

would likely be led into the belief that all the knowledgeon the subject

was confined to the House, and certainly not to the chairman of the

Coinage Committee. As to what the chairman of the National Silver

Committee advised it would have been fairer to him to have given

from the record just what he did say. The following is taken from

the report of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures to

the House, January 27, 1890, containing arguments and evidence

before the committee :

The Chairman. Let me ask just one question, Mr. Warner. I want to know —
jou, of course, have read the bill prepared by the Secretary ?

Mr. Warner. I have.

The Chairman. In j our judgment, will the passage of that bill furnish the re-
lief sought, and if not entireh , in a very large measure?

Mr. Warner. So far as the bill follows the principle evidently had in view in
its preparation, it would, unquestionably ; but in some of its sections, it seems to
me, it so far departs from the principle on which it is based as to make its opera-
tion very uncertain. The primary principle of the bill I conceive to be perfectly
sound. Bimetallism is the unlimited use of gold and silver for money. But it
is not necessary thaX the ratio between the two metals be 16 to 1 or 15} to 1, nor
is it abtolutely necessary (although much better) to have any fixed ratio at all.
The essential thing is that the two metals shall be open to monetary use without
limit That, I say, is bimetallism.

Now, if the doors of the Treasury are open to the reception of all the silver that
is offered, and all the gold that is offered, at a ratio determined by the market
price on that day or any day, that is bimetallism, whatever the ratio may be. The
ratio may be the commercial ratio as well as 16 to 1. I can not come to any other
conclusion. That being the case, so long as that principle is adhered to the oper-

136

ation of the bill would be this : Suppose, for instance, the average price of silver
yesterday in New York was 98 cents an ounce, and that the Secretary takes that
as the Treasury price for to-day — for the Secretary does not make the price ; he
simply determines the price which the buying and selling of the world makes. It
is clear that silver would not fall below that price, for there is a buyer for all that is
offered, at the price stated. The price will rest there and can not fall. It may
rise, and the tendency would be to rise, because the silver that goes into the Treas-
ury is \\ithdrawn from the markets of the world. The supply is lessened by so
much ; at the same time it is monetized through certificates — or would be if the
primary principle of the bill is carried out all the way. In short, by one and the
same act, the silver would be withdrawn from the market, and the money volume
would be increased by the certificates put out. In other words, the silver would
be monetized.

The Chairman. The effect of the passage of this bill, in your judgment, would
be the same practically as free coinage ?

Mr. Warner. It would be bimetallism, but not quite free coinage. I will come
to that in a moment. The first effect of the bill will be to stop the fall of silver.
That is, if the principle of bimetallism is strictly adhered to. If silver rises, as
doubtless it will, then immediately the advanced price becomes the Treasury price,
and it would not fall below that, but would undoubtedly rise again. It would rise,
too, the world over ; not only in New York, but in London and everywhere elee,.
and the idea of the bill, as 1 understand it, is to follow the ratio which the trade
of the world makes, at the same time operating as a ratchet to prevent a fall. It
can not be otherwise than perfectly safe for any nation, no matter how limited its
trade, to adopt that principle.

The Chairman. I want to give the committee an opportunity to make some in-
quiries, if the members of the committee desire to do so.

Mr. Warner. If you will pardon me a moment till I refer to two or three points
in which this bill, as it seems to me, so far departs from the principle I have stated
as to practically nullify the principle, and leave the bill open to the charge that
under it silver bullion is made a mere commodity, to fluctuate like anything else.
Certificates when issued, I think, instead of being redeemable of right in bullion
should be redeemable, as every other kind of paper is, in coin or lawful money.
The Secretary, of course, has always the option of redeeming paper in gold coin or
silver coin, but it should be like any other paper, redeemable in coin (or in law-
ful money) and not primarily, or as of right, in silver bullion.

Now, if you will look at the fourth section, you will see that the notes are to be
redeemed on presentation at the Treasury of the United States or at the office of
the Assistant Treasurer. How ? By the issue of a certificate of deposit for a sum
equal to the value of the bullion at that date. That is, the note, or money certifi-
cate, is redeemable in a certificate of deposit. Then how is the certificate of deposit
to be redeemed? Why, primarily and of right in silver bullion. The holder,
however, may have it redeemed in silver coin, or the Secretary may redeem it in
gold ; but primarily the certificates are redeemable in bullion.

Now the other objectionable provision is this: the discretionary power given to
the Secretary of the Treasury. If you restore silver to unlimited use as money,
which this bill, following its fundamental principle, virtually does, then you have
submitted the regulation of the money volume to the production of the mines.
That is, to natural regulation, where it always ought to rest. Now, to intrust to
one man the power to change it from natural regulation to personal regulation, lo
the will or judgment of one man, would be to trust him with the exercise of a
power that no man on earth ever held in any age of the world, and never ought
to hold. The very object of the bill is to relegate the supply and control of money
to natural causes ; and to let the principle of automatic regulation operate or not
as one man may decide, is to set aside the reason for having^ metallic money at
all. In my judgment no such power should be lodged with any officer of the
Government.

Mr. Wilcox. Is that the only objection to the bill?

Mr. Warner. These two provisions are the ones chiefly'objectionable. I think,
however, provision ought to be made for free coinage, or unlimited certificates,
when the ratio of 16 to 1 is reached, as it certainly would be under this bill.

Mr. Williams. Without these objections in the bill you speak of, do you think
the bill would put silver on an equality with gold ?

137

Mr. Warner. In not a very long time. Undoubtedly it would have that effect.

Mr. Williams. Gold is still a single standard.

Mr. Warnkr. Strictly speaking, I suppose no country in the world has a purely
gold standard or gold measure. In the United States we say we have the gold
standard, and yet the gold is diluted, so to speak, by $350,000,000 of silver and quite
a large amount of paper. In England their gold is diluted with somf $200,000,000
of paper, and eo in every other country. Our whole currency is kept at the level
of gold, but the gold does not constitute the same standard it would if all the other
kinds of money were destroyed. Suppose our money volume consisted of the
$700,000,000 of gold only, with no paper or silver, the gold in that case would have
a very different value from what it now has with silver and paper circulating with
it as part of our money, and would constitute in that case a very different standard.
It would be the same in England or any other gold-standard country. Now, if you
add more silver to our currency you make the color of the whole, so to speak, a
little whiter; you do not necessarily depart from the gold level, but the gold level
is not, however, exactly the same. In other words, gold is itself modified by addi-
tions of other money. The idea that gold constitutes an unalterable standard ia
an error which probably contributed more to the mischief of demonetization than
any thing else. It was assumed that gold possessed a fixed value, and never
changed.

The difference between opening the mints to all silver at the mar-
ket or commercial ratio, and the purchase of a given number of
ounces a month which may go back again as bullion, ought to be
apparent enough to any one. In the one case, all silver is "mone-
tized, silver metal is made a money metal as in free coinage — not at
a fixed ratio to gold, it is true, but at the market ratio existing at
the time.

In the other case a certain amount of silver is purchased for mone-
tary use, but may be reconverted into bullion to be sold as a com-
modity, and the money volume reduced by so much. In the case
where a^Z silver is made money material, if bullion were paid out by the
Treasury it might go again the next day to the Treasury as money, the
same as gold or silver under free coinage. Gold coins may be melted
into bullion, but the gold does not thereby lose its right to be money
or its potential money power ; so it would be with silver under free
coinage, or under a law where anybody at any time could deposit it
for money certificates at its market ratio. But under the committee
bill, permitting bullion redemption, only a given quantity of silver
would be purchased and that could be sent back to the bullion pile
at any time through the redemption of certificates.

The National Silver Committee persistently and unwaveringly in-
sisted that whatever silver was converted into money — was monetized —
should stay money.

Mr. Conger was still weighed down with the absurd notion
that free coinage would enable one depositing silver to put in §100
and take out $130. Just how this was to be done neither he nor the
other members of the committee who shared his .opinions on this
point, undertook to explain.

138

This is what Mr. Conger again said on this point :

But what does the Senate do with the first section of their bill? They simply
come at once to the free and unlimited coinage of silver. They open our mints,
not only to the production of our own silver mines, but open them freely to -the
production of the silver mines of all the world, if it should come here to be coined.
This means — and I tell you gentlemen, the people of this country who are clamor-
ing for free coinage do not understand the full import of immediate free coinage —
this means that the man who has $100 worth of bullion can bring it to the mints
of the United States and get $130 for it, walking away with $30 profit on each $100.
Why, it means a profit to the bullion owners of this country in a single year of
$13,000,000. Are you ready, gentlemen, to put this burden, this tax upon the con-
stituency which you represent on this floor? I, for one, am not at this present
moment.

This absurd idea was held not only by Mr. Conger but seemed to
dominate many others.

It may not even yet have dawned upon Mr. Conger that under free
coinage there could be no difference between an ounce or a pound of
silver in bars and in coins. If everybody having silver in bars could
have it stamped into coin for nothing, how could there be a difference
in the value of the silver in the one form or the other ? Under free
coinage all silver is monetized and becomes potentially money no matter
what form it is in. Coinage in that case is merely a certification of
weight and fineness.

Mr. Conger seemed astonished that Senators had not taken into
account a reason so conclusive to him against free coinage. One
would have supposed that Mr. Conger would have tried to enlighten
such novices in the study of economics as Senator Jones, of Nevada,
and others of the Senate, on a question of such vast importance 1

Mr. Conger complained, too, of lobbyists. No one ever heard, how-
ever, of his complaining of gold lobbyists, or National Bank lobby-
ists, and nobody but Mr. Conger and Mr. Taylor, of his committee,
seem to have been troubled by "silver lobbyists." But if Mr. Conger,
and some others of the House, had invited some " lobbyist," or some
one else, to give them a little elementary instruction on the subject,
they might have appeared to much better advantage to themselves in
what they had to say on the question in the House. They might, at
least, have learned that when coinage is free and unlimited all silver,
the metal itself, is monetized — is potentially money, just as all gold
now is — and that under such conditions there could be no difference
between the value of a given weight of silver in the shape of bars
or in the shape of coins, unless it be a trifling charge to take the
bars to the mints. To claim, therefore, a permanent profit to de-
positors of silver under free coinage simply exposes an inexcusable
ignorance of the •simplest principles on which metallic money rests.

139

Mr, Bland, replying to Mr. Conger, said :

The gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Congee] 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 upon 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 Coina2;e,
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 weare always beset by " lobbyists." Indeed, in
that sense we might be called lobbyists ourselves — if such a term could be ap-
plied to gentlemen upon this floor — because it is our duty to give each other all
the information that we have upon subjects of legislation and to obtain informa-
tion from all legitimate quarters.

My friend [Mr. Conger! has also alluded to a silver " pool " and silver specula-
tion. Mr, Speaker, there is but one way to prevent speculation in silver bullion,
the same sort of speculation that you have in wheat, the same sort of speculation
that you have in corn, the same sort of speculation that you have in iron and
steel and in other products. There is, I eay, 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 can not
go unless other countries should desire to pay a higher price for it. Any legisla-
tion 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 this Government.

*******

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 would 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
should 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 be-
cause 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 sppcula-
tion. What has been the consequence? Gentlemen who live in the great North-
western and Western States have been the sufferers.

********

Now, I propose, Mr. Speaker, to have read a letter that I received two or three
days ago, if the clerk will do me the kindness, to show that the agricultural people
of this country fully and completely understand this subject, and to show, also, to
my friend from Iowa that there are lobbyists in the interest of free coinage of sil-
ver even out as far as upon the prairies of Nebraska. I ask the clerk to read.

The clerk read as follows :

"Nebraska State Farmer.s' Alliance,
"President's Office, Cornell, Nebr., Jane 19, 1890.

" Dear Sir : Seeing by the papers that a conference on the silver bill has been
called, I take the liberty to address you to let you know that the farmers of Ne-
braska are not careless spectators of the struggle for free coinage of silver.

We feel that although the House bill presents a little temporary relief there
should be no temporizing or compromise. But I believe the farmers and work-

140

ing people generally of the country demand a larger increase of money, and that
there is less prejudice and objection to the increase by the free coinage of silver
than by any other way.

" We would urge you then, most respectfally, to stand by the principle, and if it
is defeated we will use our best efforts to bring its enemies before the bar of the
country for sentence and condemnation.

" Yours, with respect, "J. H. POWERS,

"President Nebraska State Fanners' Alliance."
"Hon. R. P. Bland."

Mr. POST said : Mr. Speaker, the real question before this House is whether
silver shall be recognized as a money metal. I listened with great attention to
the opening speech of the chairman of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and
Measures [Mr. Conger], and a gentleman at my side said it was an excellent
speech. I said it was, indeed, a splendid argument from a gold-standard point of
view. _ And striking out that single gold-standard point of view you will find that
there is nothing whatever in the argument. Unless we are willing to recognize
silver as a money metal we might as well, as some have said, increase the currency
by a paper money. That is the real question.

And now, Mr. Speaker, I want to refer to one other matter mentioned by the
chairman of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures, and that is to the
silver lobby, the lobby representing the silver miners that is supposed to be about
this Capitol. I want to say that I know nothing of them, I have heard nothing
of them, have seen nothing of them. There are no silver mines in my district. I
never had any interest in silver bullion and have no interest in silver in any form,
except the few coins which happen to be in my pocket. To state my connection
with this proposition whether gold and silver shall be used as money, I will say
that it commenced back in 1868, when the discussion went on in Europe that if it
were possible to induce the principal commercial nations of the world to use gold
alone as their standard, the immediate result would be to increase the value of
gold 38J per cent.

I put that statement in the speech which I made some days ago on this ques-
tion, and I have expected that possibly it would be controverted. I have not
seen it controverted, and I know that right here in the library are documents by
which I can prove every word of it. It was then pointetl out that it would be a
disadvaiitage to the producer and to the advantage of the fund-holder. I took my
stand with the producer and against the fund-holder at that time. I was abso-
amazed when I found that the United States in 1873 had fallen into the trap which
England had laid for it, and 1 think this Government was not aware of the change,
for in truth and effect the officers of the Treasury did not seem to find out that
silver had been demonetized and the single gold standard adopted for nearly a
year afterward. They continued silver all the while during that time as the
standard of these United States. And let me say right here, when people are
talking about their fear of what will happen when silver comes into use in this
way by its free coinage, that we had free coinage of silver from the commence-
ment of this Government down to 1873. We had more than that; we had the
single silver standard, and gold was simply a legal tender precisely like the green-
backs.

Mr. Kelley, of Kansas, said :

Some gentleman, two or three, in fact, I believe, on that side has presented the
idea that now to remoaetize silver would be simply giving to the bullion-holders or
bullion-producer 100 cents for 80 cents of silver. In reply to that proposition I want
to say that you have not only stolen from the bullion- producer for the last seven-
teen years that 20 cents on the dollar, but you have stolen from the corn-producer,
from the wheat producer, from the oats-producer, and from the pork and beef
producer the same sum during all of these years.

*♦***♦

And I say that in the crisis we are either about to give the farmer and the pro-
ducer the instrument with which they can help themselves to pay off the mort-
gages and be relieved from the bondholders, and the mortgage-holders, or we are

141

about to retain that power and that instrument from them and to make them
forever the slaves of the bond-holders, and the slaves of the holders of their
obligations.

It has been repeatedly asserted upon this floor, for the purpose I think of in-
fluencing votes upon this question, that if this bill is passed it will receive the veto
of the Executive of this Government. Well, I do not believe in that kind of an
argument, but inasmuch as it has been made, I want to put alongside of it this
other argument, and this further advice, that gentlemen should keep their ears
close to the ground and listen to the voice of the people ; because when this
question is voted upon to-morrow it will decide the question whether may of the-
members of this House shall return to the next House, or whether their seats are
to be occupied by others. [Applause.]

Mr. TAYLOR, of Illinois, addressing Mr. Bartine, said : Does not the gentleman
know that you can buy silver bars for 80 cents on the dollar in London to day ?

Mr. BARTINE. Yes, sir.

Mr. TAYLOR, of Illinois. Now, if they can be bought for 80 cents on the dollar
and sold here for 100 cents on the dollar, why will they not be sent here?

Mr. BARTINE. I will answer the gentleman in a word. Silver bars sell in
London at 80 per cent, to-day ; but suppose nur mints are thrown open to the
coinage of silver to-morrow, then where will you find a man who will be willing
to sell his silver at that price ? In other words, does not the gentleman see that
the opening of the mints brings up the price everywhere and destroys his whole
argument ?

Mr. TAYLOR, of Illinois. But they will bring their silver here and take away
our gold just as long as our gold holds out.

Mr. BARTINE. Not at all. At the beginning there may be one transaction of
that character, but when the silver reaches par that puts an end to speculation.
Why did it not have the effect which the gentleman suggests in France, when
they had free coinage there ? The facts are against his theory. Of course there
is a profit in the first instance, but as soon as the silver is brought to par the profit
<iisappear8. It is only because there is a little surplus of silver left over that is not
turned into coin that men got the idea of a discount upon silver ; but every nation
in the world maintains its silver money at par ; not one of them has any silver
to spare, and, as far as the coin is concerned, it could only be brought here and
recoined at a loss.

Again, we are always being confronted with the bugbear of the United Statee
being flooded with cheap silver from somewhere. That is a most remarkable ar-
gument in view of the fact that the Secretary of the Treasury shows that the total
amount of silver available for coinage after the wants of other countries are sup-
plied is only $51,000,000 a year, and he tells us that if we adopt his plan we can
take all the available silver of the world without danger or trouble ; but the in-
stant we propose free coinage the fifty-one millions become magnified into five
hundred millions, or some other almost inconceivable amount, and we are threat-
ened with the danger of a great tidal-wave of cheap silver from some unknown
and undiscoverable quarter. Now, Mr. Speaker, with reference to this suggestion,
I wish to say that the little reading and study I have been able to devote to this
subject have never brought to my attention a single nation on the face of the
earth that has been cursed with too much silver, and, as Senator Evarts shows
in his elaborate speech delivered a few days ago, our gold will not go abroad un-
less the currents of trade carry it there, and we get something for it ; and if we do
get an equivalent, what difference whether it goes abroad or not does it make?
Value is value, and if we get the same value in silver, we are not hurt. Again, it
is said that the fact of silver having depreciated under the operation of the exist-
ing law is proof that free coinage will not bring it to par. A more untenable ar-
gument than that waa never made in this world.

Mr. McKinley closed the debate by a catcli-all speech in favor of
everything that is good in money and nothing that is bad. He would
have gold, silver, and paper equal and equally good. He would
have only the best money, and, of course, the best money,- in his view,

142

is the dearest — that which is growing dearer. By parity of reason-
ing, the best yard stick woukl be the one that was growing longer
all the time. Some day we may learn that the ^' best" money
is that which is most stable in value, and that if silver is more stable
than gold it is the better money.

Mr. McKinley closed the debate with this sentence —

"And I stand here to-day speaking not for a single section but for my country
and for the whole country, and I say that it is for the highest and best interests of
all that whatever money we have it must be based upon both gold and silver and
represent the best money in the world." [Loud applau&e.]

When Mr. Bland moved to concur in the Senate amendment, the
vote was taken on section 1 of the Senate bill as follows, this being
the only yea and nay vote:

Amend by striking out section 1, and insert the following:

" That from and after the date of the passage of this act the unit of value in the
United States shall be the dollar, and the same may be coined of 412J grains of
standard silver, or of 95.8 grains of standard gold; and the said coins shall be legal
tender for all debts, public and private. That hereafter any owner of silver or
gold bullion may deposit the same at any mint of the United States to be formed
into standard dollars or bars for his benefit and without charge; but it shall be
lawful to refuse any deposit of less value than $100, or any bullion so base as to be
unsuitable for the operations of the mint."

The vote was as follows :

YEAS— 135.

Abbott,

Chipman,

Gifi"ord,

McCreary,

Sayers,

Alderson,

Clarke, Ala.

Goodnight,

McMillin,

Shively,

Allen, Miss.

Clements,

Grimes,

McRae,

Skinner,

Anderson, Kans.

Cobb,

Hare,

Mills,

Smith, 111.

Anderson, Miss.

Council,

Hatch,

Montgomery,

Springer,

Bankhead,

Cooper, Ind.

Haynes,

Moore, Tex.

Stewart, Ga.

Barnes,

Cothran,

Heard,

Morrill,

Stewart, Tex.

Bartine,

Cowles,

Hemphill,

Morrow,

Stockdale,

Blanchard,

Crain,

Henderson,N.C.Norton,

Stone, Ky.

Bland,

Crisp,

Herbert,

Gates,

Stone, Mo.

Blount,

Culberson, Tex

. Hermann,

O'Ferrall,

Tarsney,

Boatner,

Cummings,

Hoi man.

O'Neall Ind.

Tillman,

Breckinridge,Ark

. Davidson,

Keliey,

Owen, Ind.

Town8end,Colo.

Breckinridge. Ky

. De Haven,

K^rr, Pa.

Owens, Ohio,

Tucker,

Brick ner.

Dockery,

Kilgore,

Barrett,

Turner, Ga.

Brookshire,

Doreey,

Lane,

Paynter,

Turner, Kans.

Brown, J. B.

Edmunds,

Lanham,

Peel,

Venable,

Brunner,

Elliott.

Laws,

Penington,

Wade,

Buchanan, Va.

Ellis,

Lee,

Perkins,

Washington,

Bullock,

Enloe,

Lester, Ga.

Perry,

Wheeler, Ala.

Bunn,

Feathers ton,

Lester, Va.

Peters,

Whiting,

Bynum,

Fithian,

Lewis,

Pierce,

Whitthorne,

Candler, Ga.

Forman,

Magner,

Post,

Wilkinson,

Carlton,

Forney,

Mansur,

Reilly,

Williams, 111.

Carter,

Fowler,

Martin, Ind.

Richardson,

Williams, Ohio,

Caruth,

FunstoD,

McClammy,

Robertson,

Wilson, Mo.

Catchings,

Gibson,

McClellan,

Rowland,

Wilson, W. Va.

143

NAYS— 152.

Adama,

Cheatham,

Harmer,

Moore, N. H.

Allen, Mich.

Clancy,

Haugen,

Morey,

Andrew,

Cogswell,

Henderson, 111.

Morse,

Arnold,

Coleman,

Henderson, la.

Mudd,

Atkinson, Pa.

Comstock,

Hill,

Mutchler,

Baker,

Conger,

Hitt,

Niedringhaus,

Banks,

Covert,

Hopkins,

O'Donnell,

Bavne,

Craig,

Houk,

O'Neil, Mass.

Beck with,

Culbertson, Pa.

Kennedy,

O'Neil, Pa.

Belden,

Cutcheon,

Kerr, Iowa,

Payne,

Belknap,

Dargan,

Ketcham,

Pay eon.

Bergen,

Darlington,

Kinsey,

Pugsley,

Binjiham,

DeLano,

Knapp,

Quackenbush,

Bliss,

Dingley,

Lacev,

Quinn,

Boothman,

Dolliver,

LaFollette,

Raines,

Bou telle,

Dunnell,

Laidlaw,

Reed, Iowa,

Bowden,

Dunphy,

Lansing,

Reyburn,

Brewer,

Evaus,

Lehlbach,

Rife,

Brosius,

Farquhar,

Lind,

Rowell,

Brower,

Finley,

Lodge,

Rusk,

Browne, Va.

Flick,

Maish,

Russell,

Buckalew,

Flood,

Mason,

Sandford,

Burrows,

Flower,

McAdoo,

Sawyer,

Burton,

Frank,

McComas,

Scranton,

Butterworth,

Gear,

McCord,

Scull,

Caldwell,

Geissenhainer,

McDuffie,

Sherman,

Campbell,

Gest,

McKenna,

Simonds,

Candler, Mass.

Greenhalge,

McKinley,

Smith, W. Va.

Cannon,

Grout,

Miles,

Smyser,

Caswell,

Hall,

Milliken,

Snider,

Cheadle,

Hansbrough,

Moffitt,

Spinola,

Spooner,

Stephenson,

Stewart, Vt.

Stivers,

Stockbridge,

Struble,

Stump,

Sweney,

Taylor, 111.

Taylor, Tenn.

Taylor, E. B.

Thomas,

Townsend, Pa.

Tracey,

Turner, N. Y.

Vandever,

Van Schaick,

Vaux,

Wa<^dill,

Wallace, Mass.

Wallace, N. Y.

Watson,

Wiley,

Willcox,

Wilson, Ky.

Wilson, Wash.

Wright,

Yardley.

Thus the free coinage bill which passed the Senate by a majority
of 17 was lost in the House by a like majority of 17.

CHAPTER X.

The Conference Committee.

June 28th, the Senate was notified that the House had disagreed
to the Senate amendments to bill, H. R. 5381, and asked for a con-
ference^ and had appointed as conferrees on the part of the House
Messrs. Conger, Walker and Bland.

On motion of Mr. Morrill, the Senate acceded to the request of the
House for a conference, and Mr. Sherman, Mr. Jones, of Nevada, and
Mr. Harris, were appointed conferrees on the part of the Senate.

What took place in conference has not been made public, except as
to the result of the conference.

On the Tth of July, however, Mr. Bland made a personal explana-
tion in the House as follows :

Personal Explanation.

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Speaker, I desire to have read the following from the Post,
of this city, which I send to the clerk's desk.

The clerk read as follows :

No Agreement on the Silver Bill.

''The Republican members of the conference committee on the silver bill were in
session yesterday. It was the intention to hold a regular conference, but Repre
sentative Bland of the House conferrees, and Senator Harris, of the Senate con-
ferrees, were both absent. The principal topic discussed, it is understood, was in
regard to the amount of silver to be purchased monthly — whether it shall be 4,500,-
000 ounces or $4,500,000 worth.

'The proposition to strike out the bullion- redemption feature was also a subject
of some discussion. No final decision on either point was arrived at when the
meeting adjourned-

" It is expected that the conferrees will meet early next week."

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Speaker in order that I may not be put in a false light, as
not having attended to my duties in not being present at that conference com-
mittee meeting, I det»ire to have the following read.

The clerk read as follows :

"Room of Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures,

"House of Representatives, United States,

" Washington, D. C, July 3, 1890.

" Dear Mr. Bland : I saw Senator Sherman after our adjournment and we con-
cluded not to have a meeting of the conference on Saturday. Will notify you in
time of next meeting.

"Respectfully, "E. H. CONGER."

Mr. BLAND. Mr. Speaker, I desire to state that at our meeting on Thursday
last it was understood that the conference committee was to meet again at 11
o'clock last Saturday, but on Friday evening I received that note from the chair-
man of the Committee on Coinage, Weights and Measures [Mr. Congkk] notifying
me that the meeting would not be held, and hence my absence. I do not under-
stand why the statement should have been published that I was not present, I
having been notified that there would be no meeting. I do not see present this
morning the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Conger], chairman of the Committee on
Coinage, Weights and Measures, who sent me that note. I have been informed,

145

however, that it wag an effort on the part of the Republican conferre«8 to reach
some cone usioa at the m^etinaj which was held. If the committee of conference
is to degeaerate into a Rnpublican caucus, as a matter of course I will not be pres-
ent, but I am always present, when uolifit'd that there will be a meeting at which
.an effort wi 1 be madn to come to some reasonable legislation upon this subject.
I do not desire, therefore, to be advertis-'d as being absent and not attending to
my duties, the fact being that I was notified that my presence was not desired.

The following is the report of the conference committee, which
became the law, of July 14th :

[Pdblic— No. 214.]

An act directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes
thereon, and for other purposes.
Be U enacted by the Seruite and House of Represcntntives of the United Slates of
Ame^'icain Congress assembled, That the Secretary of the Treasury is herebv directed
1» purchase, from time to lime, silver bullion to the aggregate amount of four mil-
lion five hundred thousand ounces, or so much thereof as may be offered in each
moi.th, at the market prif-e thereof, not exceeditii; one dollar for three hundred
and seventy-one and twenty five hundredths grains of pue silver, and to issue in
payment for such purchaset of silver bullion Tieaeury notes of the United States
to be prepared by the Secretary of the Treasury, in such form and of such de-
nominations, not less than one dollar nor more than one thousand dollars, as he
may prescribe, and a sum sufficient to carry into effect the provisions of this yet
is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropri-
ated.

Skc. 2. That the Treasury notes issued in accordance with the provisions of this
act shall be redeemable on demand, in coin, at the Treasury of the United States,
or at the office of any assistant treasurer of the United States, and when so re-
deemed may be reissued ; but no greater or less amount of such notes shall be
outstanding at any time than the cost of the silver bullion and the standa'd silver
do] ars coined rherefrom, then held in the Treasury purchased by such notes ; and
such Tr. asury notes shall be a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and
private, except where otherwise expressly stipulated in the contiact, and shall be
receivable for customs, tax s, and all public du'S, and when so received may be
reif^Eued ; and such notes, when held by any national banking association, may be
counted as a part of its lawful ret-erve. That upon demand of the holder of any
of the Treasury notes herein provided for the Secretary of the Treasury shall,
un er such regulations as he may prescribe, redeem such notes ir> gold or silver
coin, at his discretion, it being he established policy of the United States to main-
tain the tvvo metals on a parity with each other upon the present legal ratio, or
Buch ratio as may be provided by law.

Sec. 3. That he Secretary of the Treasury shall each month coin two million
ounces of the silver bullion pun based urder the provisions of this act into stand-
ard silver dollars until the tirst day of July eighteen hundred and n netv-one,
and after that time he shall coin of the silver bullion purchased under the provis-
ions of this act as much as may be nec-ssary to provide for the redemptiori of the
Treasury notes herein provided for, and any gain or teigniorage arising from such
coinage shall be accounted for and paid into the Treasury.

Skc. 4. That the silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act shall
be subject to the requirements of existing law and the regulations of the mint
service governing the methods of determining the amount of pure silver contained,
and the amount of charges or deductions, if any, to be made.

SiiC. 5, That so much of the act of Februaiy twei tv-eighth, eighteen hundred
and eeventveight, entitled " An act to authorize thecoinage oi the standard silver
dollar and to restore its legal tender character," as requires the monthly purchase
and coinage of the same into silver dollars of not ]e^s than two mil ion dollars,
nor more than four million dollars' worth of silver bullion, is hereby repealed.

Skc. 6. Toat upm the passage of this act the balances standing with the Treas-
urer of the Unied State*" to the respective credit') of national banks for deposits
made to redeem the circulating notes of such banks, and all deposits thereafter
received for like purpose, shall be covered into the Treasury as a miscellaneous

146

receipt, and the Treasury of the United States shall redeem from the general caah
in the Treasury the circulating notes of said banks which may come into his pos
Beeeion subject to redemption ; and upon the certificate of the Comptroller of the-
Currency that such notes have been received by him and that they have been
destroyed and that no new notes will be issued in their place, reimbursement of their
amount shall be made to the Treasurer, under such regulations as the Secretary of
Treasury may prescribe, froaa an appropriation hereby, created, to be known a»
National bank notes : Redemption account, but the provisions of this act shall not
apply to the deposits received under section three of the act of June twentieth,
eighteen hundred and seventy-four, requiring every National bank to keep in
lawful money with the Treasurer of the United States a sum equal tofiveper-
centum ot its circulation, to be held and used for the redemption of its circulating
notes ; and the balance remaining of the deposits so covered shall, at the close of
each month, be reported on the monthly public debt statement as debt of the
United States bearing no interest.

" Sfc. 7. That this act shall take effect thirty days from and after its passage."

Approved, July 14,1890.

Mr. Sherman, on July 8th, called up the report in the Senate.
Prolonged discussion tool^ place, a few extracts from which are her&
given :

Mr. Sherman, in calling up the report, said :

Now, as to the second section, the legal-tender clause in the House bill, the
Senate bill was somewhat different but somewhat alike also. The legal-tender
clause of the Senate bill is as follows :

"Shall be a legal tender for the payment of all debts, public and private."

Then the question came up whether that would prevent a man making a con-
tract payable in wheat, in corn, or in whisky, or for the delivery of any other
property, or whether if a contract was made payable in gold, as in many portions'
of the country contracts are so made, a citizen of the United States should be de-
prived of the right to contract for whatever he chooses between himself and other
parties. Besides that, we found that the silver dollar had the same limitation that
was applied here. The silver dollar under the Bland law is not a legal tender
where the contract expressly stipulates that some other mode of payment shall be
made.

We therefore agreed nem.. con. that we would not give' to this Treasury note
issued for this silver a higher attribute as a legal tender than the silver dollar upon
which it was based, and you will find in the Bland law this clause, "except where
otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract." We took from that law as it has
now stood for twelve years this provision and applied it to the legal tender clause,
relating to the Treasury notes, and that would be the law which would b« applied by
the courts even without such a stipulation. But in order to make it clear, so that
the people would see the exact nature of these Treasury notes, these words were
copied from the Bland act, "except where otherwise expressly stipulated in the
contract."

It was absolutely necessary, at any rate, to make this stipulation where the Gov-
ernment has promised to pay gold, as in the gold certificates. This provision is
based on the broad principle that where two persons agree upon the mode of pay-
ment, it would be an outrage and a wrong and a denial of the right to make a
contract for us to say that the payment should be made in something or other not
provided for in the contract.

But Senator Sherman knows very well that a contract to deliver
"wheat or corn or whisky," may he liquidated in money. One fail-
ing to deliver the specific article contracted for is made to pay the value
thereof in lawful money. The Senator also knows that before the act
of 1873, or before the adoption of the Revised Statutes, June, 1874,
gold and silver coins'were equally legal tender in contracts of every

147

de8ori})tlon. A contract to deliver gold would have been discharged
by the payment of its value in silver money, or a contract to deliver
silver would have l)8en satisfied on tlie tender of <;old. Gold and
silver were alike solvents into which all obligations were resolvable,
and that condition must be restored. The Senate bill made legal-
tender for silver the same as for gold, just as it should be ; the con-
ference comioittee changed it.

Further on the following colloquy took place :

Mr. VEST. May I aek the Senator a quesfion?

Mr. SHERMAN. Certainly.

Mr. VEST. I understood him, although there was some conversation around
me at the time and I may have misunderstood him, lo assert that the language of
the first section was identical with the language of the first section in the Bland
bill, the previous silver legislation.

Mr. SHERMAN. No, I do not say that. I said that the language "at the
market price thereof" is precisely the same. The additional words "when
oflfered." I stat^^d werf^ asireeH to in conference.

Mr. VEST. I am a little curious to know on the motion of which set of conferees
those words were put in, the House or the Senate ?

Mr. SHERMAN. I should have no objection to telling, except that it is against
the express rule to do so.

Mr. VE!^T. The Senator was stating that the House demanded

Mr. SHERMAN. The Senator might be surprised at the answer if I were to
answer the question.

Mr. VEST. I am willing to be Furprised.

Mr. SHERMAN. I do not desire on the conference report to go into particu-
lars. If there is any point of this bill that any Senator desires information about
I will try to give it to him, so far as the rules of the St^nate allow.

Mr. STEWART. I should like to ask in regard to the phrase "or eo much
thereof ae m'-!v be offered in each month, at the market price thereof."

Mr. SHERMAN, I have already ststed about that. If it is not offered as a
matter of course the Secretary cannot buy it.

Mr. STEWART. I should like the views of the Senator from Ohio as to whether
it would be the duty of the Secretary of the Treasury under the language used in
the hi) 1 to buy four and a half million ounces per month if that amount were
offered, or could he decline to buy on the pref^ext that it was not offered in this
country at the market price in London ? C' uld the Secretary of the Treasury de-
press the price of silver by refusing to buy unless he could get offers at the Lon-
don pr'ce?

Mr. SHERMAN. I have no doubt the Secretary of the Treasury, under the
gravest rpsponsibilities and gravest obligations to obey this law rigidly, would not
allow him-elf any doubtful rocstruction. He vould go on and buy, whatever
might be the rf suits to him or to anybody, four and one half million ounces a
month. We cannot legislate upon the idea that the officers of the law will disre-
gard the law or evt de it or avoid it. If I thought so I would w^ant to abolish the
ofiice of the Secretary of the Treasury. The eye of any man holding that position
■would be keenly set upon the language of the law and a fair construction of the
law, and it is not to be assumed that he will avoid or t v-de the duty imposed
upon him, whether he approve 1^ or not. I have not the slightef-t doubt that the
present Secretary of the Treasury or any other Secretary, whatever may be his
party creed, would obey the law ; and if not, he ought not to be there a moment,
and he would be liable to impeachment if he disobeyed the law.

Mr. STEWART. I merely want to get the Senator's idea. The Senator then
doefl not think there car. be any danger of the Stcretary's failing to buy four and a
half million ounces of silver a month if he can get it for less than par as provided
in this set?

M. SHERMAN. I have not the slightest doubt of that. You can not legislate
upon the idea that the officers will not execute the law.

148

Mr. YOORHEES. Mr President, in the practice of my profession I always
dread a packed jury. I always am reluctant to go into a court where I know the
mind of the court is made tkp against me to try a case by a jury, a majority of
whom I know are adverse to my client.

The trouble abcut tbis bill is not a* to whether a Secretary will obey the law
where the law is made fxplicit, clear, and mandatory, but there is not a single
sectif n in this conference report or in the bill that has been reported by the con-
fereme committee but what has a f is-cretion given to the Stcretary of theTreaetuy
who is " packed " against silver.

That is my dread about this bill and one of the strong reasons why I shall not
vote for it. There is not a s'ngle section that does not convey and have in it a
discretion to the Secretary of «he Treas-ury by which he can destroy, dishonor, and
degrade silver as money; and the best evidence that that is the purpose of this
bill is to be found in the advocates of it and the advocates of these powers thus
given to the Secretary of the Treasury.

Sir, I do not seek to reflect upon the present Secretary of the Treasury — far from
it. The Treasury Department has been packed against silver ever since I have
bpen a member of this body — not merely your party on that side of the Chamber,
but my own, until I am weary of it.

Thirteen years ago when I took my seat in this body I announced my adherence
to the free coinage of s-ilver, and I have had no reason at a single moment
since to change my mind upon that subject. I represent in part one of the strong-
est Commonwealths so far as its businecs is concerned that exists beneath the flag,
and I say here to Senato)s that there are not a thousand men in the State of
Indiana (except such as desire favors at the hands of this Administration which
is adverse to the free coinage cf silver) who would not vote to-day for its free
coinage.

What is the spectacle presented here in this body ? I am amazed at Senators.
I will not use offensive language, but I am amazed at the hardihood, of Senators
who stand up in this body lo take back all we said and all we did and all we voted
for within the last three or four v eeks. Seventeen majority of the Senate of the
United States is treatfd as chaff— one fifth of this body was embodied in a major-
ity on this subject — seventeen majority for the free coinage of silver, and the rep-
resentatives of this body on the conference committee have treated that expres-
Bion as idle, and it is to go for naught I

My word for it, the Ameiican people, those who labor, thoee who toil, fhoi=e who
delve, 1 hose who sow, those who reap and mow, will not consider this ac ion on the
part of the Senate a few weeks ago ss idle or as not binding. I think I know
better why the people of this country in their trouble and distress lifted up their
heads and looked this way, and they breathed a little freer wi en they saw that
the Senate of the United States, that body so often spoken of and derided for its
conservatism and its want of progrees, had gone so far on a measure of relief for
the laboring people. They rejoiced at it, and in the last three weeks, while this
measure has been pending iu the committee of conference bound up in doubt,
more expressions in the way of petitions, and letters, and the like, have reached
here than even during the discussion that was on.

*******

Sir, the Senator from Ohio [Mr. Sherman] was inaccurate in another statement.
Heeaid this bill bad passed the Houee of Representatives after full consideration.
I deny it ; I utterly deny it. I ussert here that if the bill had had free way
without the tyranny of existing circumstances, 40 majority wouM have marked
the paspjige of a free-coinage measure in the House of Kepresentatives.

Mr. ThiLLER. Mr Prebident, I do not intend to detain the Senate at any great
leng h upon this conference repo)t. I realize full well and my experience as a
member of this body has taught me that in most cases legislation proceeds upon
a compromise, and my experience has also shown me that in a great m \iority of
cases compromises are unsatibfactory to both sides, and I have not much doubt
that if this conference report is accepted and this bill becomes a law, we shall find
that it is not entirely svhat we supposed it would be, and perhaps not what either
side expected it would be.

Mr. President, the silver question has been very thoroughly diFcuPsed. It has
been discussed here, been (iiecuesed in the public press, and I agree wth the
Senator from Indiana [Mr. Vookhebs], who haa just taken his seat, that these aw

149

about the only places where it has been discussed. I am restrained by the courtesleg
that are due to another body from expressing my opinion, which I would gladly
do were it proper for me-^o so <lo, with reference to the ourse of another branch
of the Legislature in reference to this question. I do not bfilieve I shall depart
irom the usual courtesy and go beyond the proprieties of thi? place, if I say that
in my judgment nothing done with reference to this bill in that House redounds
to the honor of the American name.

I shall not exceed, I think, the proprieties of debate when I say that what has
been considered the representative body of the American people absolutely flouted
in the face of the American people tlie demand made upon them by Wall street,
disregarding in every way the public sentiment of their constituents, for I agree
with the Senator from Texas that two-thirds of the American people to-day are
in favor of the free and unlimited coinage of silver, and I predict here now, whether
I shall be a member of the Fift3'-second Congress or not, that there will bf» a ma-
jority in the next House of Representatives in favor of the free coinage of silver,
and there will be a bigger representative vote in this body in favor of the free
coinage of silver in the Fifty-second Cnigress than there has been in this; not
simply because we shall add two new Sates with four more Senators, hut because
I believe we have reached a position in American affairs when the American
people propose to be heard upon this financial question, when the American
people, the men who toil in mills and machine shops, and in mines, and on farms,
and in o^unting-houses propose to take some hand in the legislation which con-
cerns them so much as the legislation touching money does in this country.

Mr. President, the debate in this body has I think been condu' ted with reason-
able feeling on both sides, with leasonable temper, considering the importance of
the subject discussed It hap not been so discui-^ed in the public press. We have
been derided. We men who have been in favorof continuing a policy that origin-
ated with the very origin of the Government, the maintienance of the bimetallic
system, have been derided and calumniated and slandered, not only in the public
press but in another branch of the legisldtive department. We have been told
that this legislation was born of a desire to got cheap money. We have been told
that its principal advocates were those only who were interested in the production
of silver.

Mr. Prf sident, the people of the State that I in part represent produce more silver
than any other community in the world. I would like to inquire of somebody if
it is a disgrace to produce that which has been from the dawn of civilization the
mainstay and the hope of commerce, the mainstay and the hope of civilization. I
want to know whether the men who produce silver are not as good and have not the
same right to present their interests here as the men ^ho produce iron, or woolen
goods, or any thirg else.

Mr. President, the men who produce silver do not rob anybody. They do not
steal anything that belongs to anybody else. When the hardy miner comes out
of the pit at night, if he has put in circulation an ounce more of silver or a fraction
of an ounce more of gold than was in circulation before, has added to the wealth
of the world, and he has taken nothing from anybody else. And so, Mr. Presi(^ent,
if I had made extended arguments in defeuf^e of silver, I should have done what
my brother Senators have done in the best intort-st of their States. I have said
here, and I repeat again, that I have not been moved in this matter with reference
specially to increasing the value of the product of my State, because it is produced
within the boundaries of my State.

1 have been in favor of giving it an enhanced value, because it is an American
production. I have been in favor of it principally, however, because its enhanced
price insures and secures not only to the people of this country but of all the world
its use as a money metal ; and so I have taken the time of the Senate on more
than one occasion to speak in defense of this interest, not, I repeat, because it was
the interest of Colorado alone, but because it was the interest of all the people of
the United States and all the people of the world

In another place when this matter was under discussion briefly, trammelled, ob-
structed, and hindered, where there was no fair expression of opinion, where there
was no opportunity to put the bill in proper shape, where there was denied, arbi-
trarily and illegally as it seems to me, the opportunity to make amendments, it was
eaid that there had been around the Senate and around the House during the past
winter an extensive lobby in the interest of silver. I deny it. I assert here that

150

there has been no lobby about the Senate nor about the House in favor of silver.
Last fall the people of the United States, without reference to party assembled in
the city of St. Louis in the interest of the use of silver as money.

Mr. STEWART. Mr. President, if this bill becomes a law and is executed in
good faith, as we are bound to assume that it will be, and four and a half million
ounces of silver are purchased each month, it will give great relief, and I am con-
fident that it will be an object lesson that will lead to free coinage. It is true under
the bill it is in the power of the Secretary of the Treasury to impair its usefulness
by not purchasing the full amount each mouth, but any failure to do so on the
pretext that it was not oifered at the European market value would be ench a
plain violation of the spirit of the law that it would bring down universal condem-
nation, and we can not assume or believe ihat there will be any such deeding with
the administration of the law. I believe that we shall purchase the full four and
a half million ounces each month ; that it will raise the price of silver and en-
hance the price of farm products, increase our exp >rts and increase the exports of
farm products, relieve the American people more than many now anticipate, and
that ultimately we shall have the full use of silver.

I ana confident that if by the administration of this bill it does not meet the
anticipation of the people, or with its full administration it does not answer the
purpose, the country is sufliciently educated now to take the next step imme-
diately. If it works well— furnishes the relief desired— it will stand for a consid-
erable time ; it will stand probably until w e can get co-operation with the Latin
Union. I do not anticipate cooperation with England and Germany. I think
we shall make no effort to get them. England has been on a single gold standard
since 1819 by the act which she passed in 1816, and it is not probable that she
will change. Germany has adopted the policy of England, and they can stand
on a gold basis.

France, and the associated nations with France, and the United States are
abundantly able to maintain bimetallism without any doubt on the part of any
one who has considered the subject. I have no doubt that the United States can
do it alone. Others have some doubts on that subject. They have consented to
take this step, which is in the right direction, and it is a law that we can get ; it is
all that we can get; and it seems to me that it should receive the vote of every
friend of f-ilver.

The PRES I DING OFFICER (Mr. Dolph in the chair). The question is on con-
curring in tbe report of the committee of conference, on which the yeas and nays
have been ordered.

Mr. COCKRELL. Mr. President-, I can not vote for this conference report. My
objections to it I will state as briefly as lean.

I do not agree with tbe distinguished Senator from Ohio [Mr. Sheeman] in his
interpretation of the first section of this bill. He says that it is mandatorv upon
the Secretary of the Treasury to purcha'^e 4,500,000 ounces of silver monthly. I
do not believe that that is the true interpretation of this clause. The language is :

"That the Secretary of the Treasury is herebv directed to purchase from time
to time silver bullion to the aggregate amount of 4,500,000 ounces" —

Now, that would be -^Qandatory, but the qualifying words are ;
" or so much thereof as may be oftered, in each month, at the market price thereof
not exceeding $1 for 371.25 grains of pure silver."

Mr. MITCHELL. May I ask the Senator a quf stion right there?

Mr. COCKRELL. Certainly.

Mr. MITCHELL Does the Senator, in 8p?aking of the qualifying words, refer
more particularly to the words wliich speak of the market price?

Mr. COCKRELL. I refer to the words " or so much thereof as may be offered,"
in connection with the market price. I say that under this proposed law the Sec-
retary of the Treasury determines, decides, declares what is the market price.
JNobody else can do it.

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. May I ask the Senator why equally the Secretary of
the Treasury does not declare the market price under the Bland act? The law-
says that he shall buy at the market price, and fixes that as the price.

Mr. COCKRELL. Under the Bland act, which I hold in my hand, he must pur-
chase a certain amount.

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. At the market price ?

Mr. COCKRELL. Yes ; but not " or so much thereof as may be offered, in eack
month, at the market price."

151

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. He could not buy more than the law fixed at the mar-
ket price.

Mr. COCKRELL. Tne Bland act says that he must purchase not less thaa
'JJjOOOjOOO wfirth in each mouth at the market price.

Mr. JOXES, of Nevada. But suppoae he can not get it at the market price ?

Mr. COCKRELL. But he always has done it.

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. He fixes the market price equally under the Bland
act as he will do under his bill.

Mr. COCKRELL. H-^ fix^is the market price there, but that amount is not one-
half the product of the United States, while in this case you give him the power
to purchase 4,500,000 ounces a month, which per year is ^reatir than the product
of the mines of the United States; and you say "or so much thereof as may be
offered." You do not compel him by saying that he must purchase 4,500,009
ounces per month.

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. Then the Senator is afraid there will not be that much
silver offered to the Secretary of the Treasury?

Mr. COCKRELL. He is to purchase it at the price which the Secretary of the
Treasury may determine to be the market price.

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. But he is not obliged to buy the $2,030,000 worth a
month under the Bland act, except at the market price.

Mr. COCKRELL. I say he is obliged to buy 12,000,000 worth a month under
the Bland act.

*♦*»*♦♦

Mr. MITCHELL. The question I desire to ask the Senator from Missouri is this :
}ie says the Secretary of the Treasury under the Bland act has the power and the
right to fix the priced silver. Suppose he should determine what price he would
pay, and he would say so to the owners of silver bullion, and not a man should re-
spond, there would not be an ounce furnished, and therefore he could not buy and
would not buy. What I want to know is, would the Secretary of the Treasury be
impeachable for not buying $2,000,003 worth per month under the Biand act in
that case ?

Mr. COCKRELL. Yes, he would be under the Bland act, just the reverse of
what he would be uuder this proposed act. He must pui-chase not less than
■f 2,000,000 worth per month under the Bland act. You have no limit here.
*******

Mr. JONES, of Nevada. The words "directed to purchase" and ''shall pur-
chase" mean substantially the same thing ; and it strikes me the Senator is mak-
ing a mountain out of a mole-hill. The fact of the business is, that it was be-
lieved, and I believe, unless the production of silver shall largely iacrea8<=i, the
4,500,000 ounces per month will more than exhaust the world's demand at the
rate of a dollar for 371] erains of pure silver, and that clause was simply put in
80 that in case all the silver available for purchase was exhausted, the Secretary
of the Treacury would have fulfilled the law by purchasing all that was offer^
at a price not exceeding a dollar for 371', grains.

Mr. SPOONER. Has there been any difficully, does the Senator know, in as-
certaining the market price for purchases under the Bland law?

Mr. COCKRELL. I suppose not, because there was a greater quantity in the
market tlian there was a demand for. There was a greater amount of bullion,
and within the amount which the Si^cretary would off'er to buy he would say, " I
will give this day so much an ounce," and they would gladly take it, becauee there
was no other market.

Mr. SPOONER. If the Secretary of the Treasury could without difficulty as-
certain the market price under the Bland law, why may he not without difficulty
ascertain the market price under this proposed law?

Mr. JONE*?, of Nevada By the same means.

Mr. SPOONER. And by the same means. The market price would not be one
thing under the operation of one law and another thing under the operation of
the other, would it ?

♦ ***♦*♦

Mr. HISCOCK. That is all there is of it and all there can ba of it. As I said
a momeut ago, the market price which is to b 3 observe! and which must be ob-
served under this bill is reiogaizBi throu^hou'; the length and breadth of the
commercial world, and I believe the Secretary of the Treasury who ignores it ia

152

the purchase of silver or in the execution of the law renders himself liable to im^
peachment and to degradation from his high office. Under this provision of the
law there is no chance for playing upon its execution, cheating the public, or
cheating the law-makers. Who dare do it? It is flashed all over the countrjr
through the markets of the world that the Secretary of the Treasury is higgling
over words of the interpretation of the provision of the law, chaffiag with a man
who offered his silver and saying "I will not be controlled by the quotations in
respect to it," and refusing the execution of the law. D jes the Senator believe or
suppose that in the administration of this bill we are to be confronted by any
such condition as that? The Senator from Colorado [Mr. Teller] fairly stated a
sufficient reason why there certainly was no objection to this language being em-
ployed in the bill.

Mr. Cockrell continued the next day to discuss the various features
of the bill, quoting an editorial from the New York Evening Post.

The discussion of the conference report continued to July 10, and
was participated in by Mr. Morgan, Mr. Allison, Mr. Vance, Mr.
Mitchell, Mr. Plumb, Mr. Faulkner, Mr. Teller, and others.

Mr. Morgan called attention to the omissions from the conference
report of the section in the House bill providing for free coinage
when silver reached parity with gold, as follows :

Connected with the House proposition — and I wish to cSll 'attention to this
fact — was section 6, as follows :

"Sec 6. That whenever the market price of silver, as determined in pursuance
of section 1 of this act, is 11 for 371 25 grains of pure silver, it shall be lawful for
the owner of any silver bullion to deposit the same at any coinage mint of the
United States, to be formed into standard silver dollars for his benefit, as provid«^d
in the act of January 18, H37. And purchases of silver bullion shall be suspended
while it is being so deposited for coinage."

The conference committee came in here leaving section 6 entirely out; it is not
in their bill. There is no substitute for it, and there is nothing that looks in that
direction. It is all as dark as Erebus, so far as it relates to th« ri ^ht of any man
whea silver gets to be worth more than a dollar for 3711 grains to go to the miat
and have it coined, or to ask the Government to take any action upon it at all.

Before the vote was taken Mr. Blair said :

Mr. President, I think nothing so adds to the happiness of the surroundings as
for a sick man to take his medicine cheerfully ; and as I intend to vott for this
bill, after listening to one Senator from Oregon who finds in it the gold standard,
that it is a gold measure, and the other Senator frem Oregon who finds in it un-
limited or free coinage in substance, and the Senator from Kansas who is satisfied
that it is a f-ee-coinage bill, and the Senator from Colorado who is not satisfied

{)reci8ely what it is, but is very well satisfied with it, I thought that I would vote
or the bill, but that I would give notice to the Senate that under no circumstances
whatever, liere or elsewhere, would I ever give a single reason for so doing,
[Laughter.]

The conference report was agreed to in the Senate, July 10th, by

the following vote — yeas 39, nays 26, as follows :

YEAS— 89.

Aid rich,

Dixon,

Hiscock,

Pettigrew,

Sherman,

Allen,

D.)lph,

Hoar,

Pierce,

Spoon er,

Allison,

Edmunds,

In gal Is,

Piatt,

Squire,

Blair,

Evarts,

Joups of Nev.

Plumb,

Stewarh,

Casey,

Far well,

McMillan,

Prtwer,

Stockbridge-

Cullom,

Frye

Manderson,

Quay,

Washburn.

Davis,

Hawley,

Mitchell,

Sanders,

Wolcott.

Dawes,

Higgins,

Moody,

- Sawyer,

Barbour,

Bate,

BlackbHrii,

Call,

Carlisle,

Cockrell,

Berry,
Blodgett,
Brown,
Butler,

NAYS— 26.

Coke.

Hampton,

Pugb,

Voorbees,

Colquitt,

Harris,

Ransom,

Walthall.

Daniel,

JoQps of Ark.

Reagan,

Faulkner,

Kenna,

Tu'pie,

Gibson,

MoPherson,

Vance,

Gorman,

Pasco,
ABSENT— 19.

Vest,

Cameron,

Gray,

Morrill,

Teller,

Chandler,

Hale,

Paddock,

Wilson of Towa,

Eustis,

Hearst,

Payne,

Wilson of Md.

George,

Morgan,

Stanford,

The Conference Keport in the House.

The report of the conference committee having been agreed to in
the Senate, it was called up in the House the following day, July 11th.

The statement of the House conferrees as to the report was a&
follows :

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the statement of the House conferrees.

The Clerk read as follows :

"The managers on the part of the House of the conference on the disagreeing
votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill H. R. 5381,
directing purchases of ailver bullion and the issue of Treasury notas thereon, and
for other purposes, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of
their action :

" The effect of the alterations made in the House bill by the conferrees is to
change the amount of bullion purchased monthly from four and a half million
dollars' worth to four and a half million ounces, or so much thereof as may be
offered ;

" To modify the legal-tender clause by inserting the words * except where other-
wise expressly stipulated in the contracts ; '

•' To substitute for the bullion-redemption proviso a requirement that upon de-
mand the Secretary of the Treasury shall redeem the notes in gold or silver coin
in his discretion, and a declaration that it is the established policy of the United
States to maintain a parity between the two metals at the present legal ratio or
such ratio as may be provided by law;

"To require the monthly coinage into dollars of 2,000,000 ounces of the bullion
purchased until July 1, 1891 ;

" To omit the conditional free-coinage section."

Mr. CONGER. I move that the House agree to the report of the conference
committee; and upon that 1 demand the previous question.

Mr. BLAND. We raise the question of consideration, and I can tell the gentle-
man from Iowa [Mr. Conger] that he will not hasten this bill through in this
way. This measure was debated in the Senate for three days ; and on this side
of the House gentlemen who are opposed to this bill, and regard it as the worst
bill yet proposed on the subject — a bill which has had incorporated into it in con-
ference many features that were never adopted by either House — intend, if we
•an, to insist on debating the measure.

The first roll-call showed no quorum present, and a call of the
House was ordered and an adjournment eflected at 8 o'clock.

The bill came up again on the 12th. Some discussion followed^
but there was little said touching the merits of the question. Per-
haps Mr. Hermann, of Oregon, expressed in the following remarks
the sentiment of a majority of silver men on his side of the House :

Mr. HERMANN. Mr. Speaker, this legislation is a compromise. It is not what
Wall street wanted, nor is it what the people of the country wanted, so far as free.

1^4

and unlimited coinage of the silver dollar is meant. It ifl not the fullest recog-
nition of the equality of gold and silver as money metals. It means, however, a
great concession on both sides. Above all, its results mean a victory to popular
demand. It is a great advance toward free coingge. Now, we have a coinage of
$2-l:,C 00,000 per annum. Under this bill we shall secure $70,000,000 per annum.
The two metals are nearer on a parity to day than they were on yesterday. There
will be offered and there will be purchased by the Secretary of the Treasury
4,500,000 ounces of siher bullion. This will give what the cuuntry has been eo
long and so loudly demanding — more money. It will stimulate production, be-
cause as silver is raised in price, so will also be the product of agriculture. New
markets will be afforded, and there will be a universal stimulant to trade and
traffic throughout the broad confines of the Republic.

Should the fears now expressed be realized as to the failure of a faithful enforce-
ment of the law, we shall have the eucceeding Congress to remedy any existing
defects, and I have no fear that with the sentiment now abroad in our nation
there will be a stronger representation in this House after the fall elections on the
line of free coinage of silver than now exists. This is not a political question. It
is not a question for the caucus. It is a business proposition. It is a question of
dollars and cents, and goes to the material prosperity of the nation, and to every
man, woman, and child in it.

It is the duty of a Representative, after having sought to secure the highest
ultimatum of his people's wishes, to accept the nearest approach to this, in view
of the difficuldes of harmonizing on a more satisfactory basis.

And Mr. Allen, of Mississippi, expressed, no doubt, in the follow-
ing quotation from his remarks, the feeling of many of the silver
men on the other side of the Rouse :

Mr. ALLEN, of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, after listening to those gentlemen on
the other side who are trying to explain and give their reasons for voling for this
conference report, I would commend to them the caution of Senator Blair, who
said in the Senate that he was going to vote for it, but that he wanted it distinctly
understood that he would never, in the Senate or elsewhere, undertake to explain
or give a reason for so doing. [Laughter.]

Mr. Speaker, I want to say to those gentlemen who represent the silver-produc-
ing section of the country, who are the champions of silver as silver, that we
tbink they have acted in bad faith toward u«, the friends of silver as money.
They pretended to be for free coinage, and when with our help they could have
had free coinaije, and the gold standard men became scared and bousrht them off
by giving them, as they think, a market fnr their silver by requiring the Govern-
ment to purchase and store away their bullion, they deserted us. We are not
championing the cause of silver as a commodity to be stored in warehouses. We
are no more for silver as a mere commodity than we are for any other of our prod-
ucts. We b'^lieve silver should be coined into money just as gold is, but you de-
sert us on this issue, and let silver as a money go to the "demnition bowwows."
[Laughter] You think you have a market for your bullion and you make terms
with the enemies of silver money, and leave the real friends of free coinage in
the lurch.

The vote on the conference report was as follows :

YEAS— 122.

Adams,

Coleman,

Henderson, la

. Mudd,

Spoouer,

Allen, Mich.

Cnmstock,

Hermann,

Niedringhaus,

Stephenson,

Anderson, Kans.

Conger,

Hid,

O'Neill, Pa.

Stewart, Vt.

Atkinson, Pa.

Connell,

Hitt,

Oeborne,

Sriverp,

Atkinson, W. Va.

Cooper, Ohio,

Hopkins,

Oiven, Ind.

Stockbridge,

Baker,

Cntcheon,

Houk,

Payne,

Sweney,

Banks,

Dalzell,

Kelley,

Payaon,

Taylor, 111.

Bartine,

Darlington,

Kennedy,

Perkins,

Taylor, E. B.

Bayne,

Dingley,

Ketchara,

Peters,

Taylor, J. D.

Beckwich,

Dolliver,

Kinsey,

Pickler,

Thoman,

Belknap,

Doreey,

Lacey,

Post,

Thompson,

156

Jiergan,

Blis?,

Bowden,

Brewer,

Brosius,

Brewer,

Buchanan, N. J.

Burton,

Cftkivrell,

Cannon,

Carter,

Caswell,

Cheadle,

Cogswell,

Dunnell,

Farquhar,

Feathers ton,

Fiuley,

FJick,

Flood,

Frank,

Funstou,

Gear,

Gest,

Gifford,

Grosvenor,

Haugen,

Henderson, 111.

Catchings,

Cbipman,

Clancy,

Cluuie,

Cooper, Ind,

Cothran,

Grain,

Crisp,

CuUterson, Tex

Davidson,

Dibble,

Dockery,

Dunpby,

Elliott,

Ellis,

Ealoe,

Forman,

Forney,

T.a Foliette,

Laidlaw,

Law8)

Lehlbach,

McComas,

McCord,

McCormick,

McDuffie,

ilcKenna,

Moffilt,

Morey,

M'^rrill,

Marrow,

Morse,

NAYS— 90.

Goodnight,

Hayes,

Heard,

Hemphill,

Hendereon,N,

Holman,

Hooker,

Kerr, Pa.

.Lanham,

Lawler,

liester, Va.

ijewiP,

Maish,

Martin, Ind.

Martin, Tex.

MoAdoo,

McClammy,

McClellan,

Qaackenbush,

Raines,

Ray,

Reed, Iowa,

Reybum,

Rife,

Rockwell,

Rowell,

Russell,

Scull,

Simonds,

Smith, 111.

^mlth, W.Va.

Snider,

Townsend.Colo.
Townsend, Pa.
Vandever,
Van Schaick,
Walker, Mass.
Wallace, N.Y.
Williams, Ohio.
Wilson, Ky.
AVilpon, Waah.
Wright,
Yardlev.

Abbott.
Allen, Miss.
Anderson, Miss.
Bank head,
Barwig,
Bland,
Blount,
3oatuer,

Breckinridge, Ark.
Breckinridge, Ky.
Brickner,
Brookshire,
Brunner,
Buchanan, Va.
Bullock,
Bynum,
.Candler, Ga.
Carlton,
Not voting, 116.

The yeas, on this vote, were all Republicans and the nays all
Democrats.

With this vote ended all action on the silver question in the first
session of the Fifty-first Congress. The act went to the President
and was approved, and became a law, July 14, 1890.

McCreary,
McVIiUin,
McRae,
Mutchler,
C.Norton,
Gates,

O'Neall, Ind.
O'Neil, Mass.
Owens, Ohio,
Parrett,
Paynter,
Petl,

Penington,
Pierce,
Price,
Qxinn,
Reilly,
Robertson,

Rogers,

Rusk,

SayerP,

Shively,

Stewart, Tex.

Stockdale,

Stone, Ky.

Stone, Mo.

Tillman,

Tracey,

Venablfi,

Wheeler, Ala.

Whitthorne,

Wike,

Willcox,

Williams, 111.

Wilson, W. Va.

Yoder.

CHAPTER XI.

The Effect of the Law.

As frequently stated in the debates and in the press, the law is a
Gomproinise, not entirely satisfactory to either side.

That it is, however, a step forward — a step in the direction of
free coinage — can not be denied. The effect already has been bene-
ficial. The price of silver has advanced under it, and M^ith it the
price of agricultural products^ especially of wheat and cotton.

The advance alone in the price of wheat and cotton exported will
much more than make up for the silver bullion which, under the law,
will be retained in this country for monetary use^ but which other-
wise would go abroad in settlement of trade balances. There are
other causes, of course, operating to advance the prices of certain
agricultural products, but the increase in prices traceable directly to
the effect of the silver legislation will amount to hundreds of million*
in the aggregate.

As to the relation of silver to wheat and cotton the following from
the pen of Mr. H. Carey Baird is to the point:

Cheap Silver and Indian Competition.

Many editors profoundly versed in economic questions have treated the price
of silver as a mattei of entire national unconcern of no interest whatsoever ex-
cept to the silver miner. Elsewhere, however, I have repeatedly endeavored to
arouse our people to a rpalization of the danger of silver depreciation through the
competition of India with American wheat, and the actual relation of this depre-
dation to this competition. The wheat export of India is now more than one-
third of that of the United States, and there is hardly a limit to its possible ex-
pansion.

The silver question, therefore, possesses a vital significance not for one moment
dreamed of in the philosophy of those who ever since the passage of the aot of
February 28, 1878, denounced the silver dollar. Every man, woman and child in
the country has an interest in arresting the downward progress in the price of it,
and in its restoration, at least, to its re ation with gold as indicated in our com-
age — 1 to 16. Every step irt its downward progress is in an equal measure a
bounty on the export of Indian products, the prices of which are paid in silver
rupees.

There is positively nothing but ruin in the anti-silver scheme. Even the theory
of financial disaster through silver coinage, so loudly and wildly, promulgated by
its advocates, is being disproved by the wonderful development of the trade and
manufactures of India during the past eight years, a fair idea of which is given in
the growth of her cotton industry between 1882 and 1885, as seen above. It was
in vain that she endeavored to retain a revenue duty of 5 per cent, on imports of
cotton goods. The Manchester cotton manufactures obliged the Indian govern ■-
ment to repeal that duty, although the revenue was absolutely necessary. Now
she has 15 to 20 per cent, by reason of depreciation of the rupee in sterling ex-
change, and this duty or bounty can alone be repiealed by the free and unlimited
coinage of silver b> the Government of the United States for all comers. Will
that Government, then, do its duty ? Yes, it will.

157

The Efkect op Oue Silvkr Law Abroad.

Mr. Moreton Frewen, writing from England, on the effect of our new silver law
in that country, pays : '• I venture to think that th« pressure upon the En^ilish
money market a liitle later, will come less from Paris than New York. Perhaps
you will permit me to make a forecast of what is about to occur. It U less a fore-
cast, indeed, than a statement of the policy which the silver men at Washington
are determined to pursue. This silver market will be very bare of supplies after
Christmas, so that before the next session of Congress is half through the United
States par of exchange (1 to 15) will have been rettored, and the rupee will be at
22 pence. There will then be a proposal, supported by both political parties, that
the United States shall join the monetary league of the Latin union, with mints
open at 1 to 15^. We shall then have entered upon this currency phase. Any
ibl ounces of silver coined at Washington will enable the holder to draw an ounce
ef gold from the Bank of England, the bank being powerless to protect its re-
serves. The operation will be conducted on these lines. I take silver to the
United States mint, which is coined freely, and returned to me, if I prefer, in the
form of notes. These notes t deposit in my bank in New York, and I proceed to
invest my bank balance in the purchase of New York Central railway bonds.
These bonds I sell by cable in London for gold ; s^i that just as long as any Euro-
pean investor will buy American sureties every 15J ounces of silver will be avail-
able to draw an ounc*> of gold from the Bank of Eiigland, the bank having no dis-
crei ionary power to refuse to pay gold."

Mr. Cameron said in the Senate, since the passage of the law, in re-
plying to Mr. Vest —

What Mr. Brown says is entirely coirect as to the depreciation in the value of
lands, but in my opinion it has not been the tariff" that has caused the decline in
lands. It was the demonetization of silver in 1873. Ever since that demonetiza-
tion the price of land has decreased, and it has decreased as the price of silver
has decreased. With the passage of the recent silver bill I know certainly that
the prices of cereals has risen some 20 per cent., and I think that before a year
goes round the lands in Pennsylvania will recover their old value.

Ex-Senator Warner Miller said recently in a speech —

Another cause for the low prices of agricultural products has been the trouble
In the currency. There has been too liitle currency, not only in the United States,
but in other countries. The volume of money is the indicator by which the value
of all products is measured. The passage of the silver bill baa already had a
marked eff'-ct on agricul'ural affairs. This has had much to do with the rise in
farm product'^ during the last five months, although it must be borne in mind that
the crops this year are not up to the average. While farmers have had a hard
time for the last few years I predict that in the next five years the condition of
agricultural affairs will be greatly improved.

A distinction must be made, however, between the effect of the law
on silver bullion and on wheat and cotton and on prices generally.

The effect on silver bullion is direct by increasing the demand for
more silver for money ; the effect on wheat and cotton is more or less
direct as it affects competition with India. But the permanent effect
of the new law on prices generally is only as it affects the volume of
money. If it operates to increase the volume of money, relatively to
population and wealth, then it will tend to raise prices generally.
But if the increase in the money volume, in consequence of the new
law, is only sufficient to take the place of bank notes retired, and
supply the needs of the increase in population, then the permanent

158

effect will be only to prevent a further fall of prices. Hence, those who'
look for a general, permanent and material rise of prices, as the nec-
essary consequence of the operations of the new law, are likely to
be disappointed ; while those who look only for steadiness of prices,
or at any rate, no downward tendency, will find, doubtless, in the end
that their calculations are more in harmony with legitimate deduc-
tions from sound monetary principles.

By the time Congress meets in December a better opportunity will
be afforded to judge the law. But it can never be accepted as a final
settlement of the silver question. That can be finally settled only
by the full restoration of silver to its constitutional place as a money
metal by the side of gold, with all the rights of mintage and legal
tender accorded to gold. The two metals must stand together as
money metals, open to free use everywhere for money. It is not so
much that he who mines gold or mines silver thereby acquires the
right to have it coined into money, as it is the right, by consti-
tutional provisions and ancient usage, of everybody to have recourse
to gold and silver, without limit or restriction, for money purposes in
carrying on business and in the payment of taxes and the discharge
of all obligations. That right must be restored, and the advocates
of bimetallism will not cease the agitation of the silver question till
silver is restored to unlimited coinage and full legal-tender, the same
in all respects as gold.

The End.

//. i^JF

A^l^JPKNJDIX.

The following is from a letter from Ottoniar IIanj)t, a distingiiislied
authority on economic qiiestionvS, on the Future of Silver, as taken
from a translation in the Argonaut:

THE FUTURE OF SILVER.

ESTIMATED CONSUMPTION OF SILVER FOR THREE OR FOUR YEARS TO COME — IT CERTAINLY
LOOKS AS THOUGH THE PROSPKCT FOR THE WHITE METAL WAS VERY FLATTERING.

Under this heading the London Economist of August 16 publishes a letter from
Ottomar Haupt, dated Parie, August 14, 1890. As M. Haupt is acknowledged to
be one of the best authorities in Europe in monetary statistics and financial
affairs bis figures of the past can be relied upon, however we might regard his
speculations in the future.

The letter is some two columns in length, but I shall only give the first and a
portion of the closing paragraphs. I have transposed his kilograms into ounces,
ae more familiar to us of America :

"At the present moment when the new American silver bill comes into force,
and when consequently a fresh prospect opens itself to the whole silver question,
it is of great importance to inquire what tlie future of the white metal will be — of
course the near future only, as in the course of time events may present them-
selves which may once more adversely influence the current of things as viewed
from a standpoint based upon the experience of the day.

"This is the way in which I estimate the yearly absorption of the white metal
for, say, three or four years to come.

Countries. Ounces Fine Silver.

United States 54,000,000

India 41600,000

China 12,800,000

Japan 7,680,000

Cochin China 640 OUO

Straits Settlement- 3,200,000

England and Colonies 3,200,000

Austria 3,840,000

Servia and Bulgaria 1,920,000

Balance remaining in Mexico 1,600,000

130,480,000
Estimated consumption in the arte, etc 17,600,000

148,080,000

" In other words, about 150,000,000 ouaces of fine silver will have to be bought
in some way or other in the different markets of the world, and, so far, no
other source is left open for that purpose than the actual production of the mines.

"At any rate, neither will Germany sell any more of her silver thalers, nor Italy
her demonetized Bourbonian piastres. As regards the other countries, none will
move in the silver question. Their coins of the five-franca type represent the
metal in the market at much above 61 pence per ouuce standard. The American
mint price woiksout at $1.29, equal to 59 psnce; today (August 14), we are about
51 pence. Who will sell with euch prospect before him ?

"A given quantity of •jay 150,000,000 ounces of fine silver is required every year
in the near future. What will be the production of the metal available in the
market? Why, according to the beat statistics published, all the mines of the

160

world did not produce more than 98,000,000 ounces in 1887, 110,000,000 in 1888,
and 125,000 000 in 1889. Where is the balance of say 16.000 000 to come from ?"

Thus far M. Haupt, althoutfh according to his own figures the deficit must ex-
wed considerably the 16,000,000 ounces. I have compared his estimate with the
report made bv Mr. Leech, Director of the Mint, to the Secretary of the Treasury,
dated April 28, 1890. He makes the prnduction of silver in the world pracically
the Pame as M. Haupt, say, 1887, 96 189,000 ounces of fine silver, 1888, 110,086,453,
and 1889, 126 000,000 ounces. It may be of interest to note his production of
silver in the United States for those years: 1887, 41, :i60,000 ounces; 1888,45,780,-
000 ounces; and in 1889, 50,000,000 ounces.

As regards the quantity used in the arts, the Director sent a circular letter to
forty seven firms, believed to comprise all the firms in the United States engaged
in tbe business of making bars of gold and silver, and deduces from the replies
received that the value of the silver used in the industrial arts in the United
Stat^ps during the year 1889 approximated $8,760,000. Therefore, presumptively,
M. Haupt's estimate of consumption in the arts of 17,600,000 ounces of fine silver
is very moderate. The Director of the Mint in his report mentiocs the large ship-
ments of silver to India in 1889, amounting for the year to about $40,000,000.

Wtiile on ibe subject it may be of interest to give the amount of gold aijd silver
in the great national depositories of Europe at latest date (August 21), according
to the Financial, Chronicle of New York, August 23 :

Banlc ot Gold. Bilter.

England.- £22,653225

France ., 52,668 000 £50,757,000

Germanv 27,512,667 13 756,333

Austria Hungary 4,475,000 16,536,000

Netherlands 4,808,000 5,358.000

Belgium 2,823,000 1,412,000

Probably about all of this gold and silver in the different banks is coined money,
most of which has been in use.

I have in this article gi< en the figures of production and absorption as agreed
upon by those who are cor-sidered the most capable of rendering them. It is for
others to prophesy what shall be the future, but it certainly looks as though tbe
prospect for ''the white metal " was very QxxteriQg.— The ArgonavU, San Franciseo,
Cal.

San Fkajjcisco, September 1, 1890.