.- •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.
 
 10 
 
 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
 
 11 
 
 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
 
 12 
 
 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
 
 14 
 
 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
 
 ]5 
 
 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 ?
 
 17 
 
 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.
 
 18 
 
 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
 
 19 
 
 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
 
 20 
 
 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.
 
 21 
 
 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 ?"
 
 22 
 
 ''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 ^
 
 23 
 
 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.
 
 24 
 
 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
 
 25 
 
 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
 
 26 
 
 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
 
 27 
 
 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.
 
 28 
 
 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
 
 29 
 
 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
 
 30 
 
 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 ?
 
 31 
 
 " 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,
 
 32 
 
 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. 
 ********
 
 34 
 
 ''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?"
 
 35 
 
 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."
 
 36 
 
 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.
 
 39 
 
 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.
 
 40 
 
 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-
 
 41 
 
 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^
 
 42 
 
 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
 
 40 
 
 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
 
 47 
 
 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.
 
 48 
 
 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
 
 49 
 
 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-
 
 50 
 
 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
 
 51 
 
 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.
 
 53 
 
 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
 
 • 
 
 54 
 
 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-
 
 55 
 
 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
 
 56 
 
 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
 
 57 
 
 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,-
 
 58 
 
 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."
 
 59 
 
 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,
 
 60 
 
 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
 
 61 
 
 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.
 
 62 
 
 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.
 
 63 
 
 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 : 
 
 I, 
 
 " 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.
 
 64 
 
 '' 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.
 
 66 
 
 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.
 
 67 
 
 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.
 
 68 
 
 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
 
 69 
 
 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.
 
 70 
 
 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
 
 71 
 
 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
 
 73 
 
 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.
 
 74 
 
 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. ]
 
 76 
 
 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.
 
 77 
 
 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
 
 78 
 
 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
 
 79 
 
 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-
 
 80 
 
 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
 
 81 
 
 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.
 
 82 
 
 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.
 
 83 
 
 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
 
 84 
 
 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.
 
 85 
 
 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.
 
 86 
 
 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.
 
 87 
 
 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
 
 88 
 
 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
 
 90 
 
 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.
 
 D2 
 
 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
 
 93 
 
 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,
 
 94 
 
 
 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.
 
 95 
 
 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.
 
 96 
 
 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
 
 97 
 
 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
 
 98 
 
 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
 
 99 
 
 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
 
 in 
 
 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, 

 
 U3 
 
 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.