Full text of The Money Question of the 52nd Congress : Free Coinage of Silver : Speech of Hon. Charles W. Stone of Pennsylvania, Debate in the House of Representatives

The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.

FREE COINAGE OF. SILVER.

SPEECH
OF

HON. CHARLES W. STONE,
OF

PENNSYLVANIA,

IN THE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,




Wednesday, March 23, 1892.

WASHINGTON.
1892.




SPEECH
OF

HON.

CHARLES

W.

STONE.

The House having under consideration the hill (H. R. 4426) for the free coinage of gold and silver, for the issue of coin notes, and for other purposes-

Mr. CHARLES W . STONE said:
Mr. SPEAKER: I understand fully the very natural desire of the
gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. W I L L I A M S ] to assume the
leadership and direction of the opposition to this bill. I concede
with as full an appreciation as any of his friends on this floor the
brilliant talents and the careful study which would render him
efficient in the discharge of the duties of that position. So far
as he assumes to speak for himself, so far as ho represents his
own interests, so far as he represents the interests and sentiments
of his constituents, Tsay not one word. But when (he assumes
to represent the Democratic party and to ally it as a party in the
least degree to the opposition to this bill, or to speak for the
Republican party, I most emphatically dissent.
The Democratic party is not opposed to this bill. There is
nothing in its history, nothing in its affiliations, nothing in its
instincts, that would bring it into opposition to this bill. When
the issue of the greenback seemed necessary to the salvation of
the nation, the Democratic party opposed it. When the redemption of the greenback was necessary to the honor of the nation, the
Democratic party opposed it. When the stability of the present
financial system is necessary for the continued prosperity of this
country, the Democratic party assails it. Whenever you raise
the standard of any measure that proposes to roll back the wheels
of progress for twenty years, as this bill does, and to restore a
condition which in the fast movements of modern events we have
outgrown, the Democratic party will always rally to that stand
ard.
There must be no misapprehension of the position of the two
parties on this question. The voice of the gentleman from Massachusetts is not the voice of the Democratic party. The voice
of that party is the voice of the gentleman from Missouri [Air.
BLAND], the chairman of the Committee on Coinage. Weights,
and Measures, the authorized and accredited spokesman of the
Democratic party upon this question on this iloor. The voice of
the Democratic party on this question is that of the gentleman
from Tennessee [Mr. PIERCE], who has just taken HIS seat, who
told you recently that twenty-eight Democratic State cohventions'have indorsed the principle of this bill and only two have
opposed it.
The fact that individual members of that party—and I honor
themfortheircourage, for their frankness, andfor their honesty—
218




3

may have separated from their party on this question, does not
affect the attitude of the party any more than the fact that individual members of the Republican party, like the gentleman
from Nevada [Mr. BARTINEJ, the gentleman from Colorado [Mr.
TOWNSEND], and others, bowing to the sentiments of their constituents, and properly representing those sentiments, see fit to
support this bill, changes the attitude of the Republican party
in regard to it. The one party as a party is in favor of this bill
and the other opposed to it, and the courtesy of the Republican
members of the minority of the committee must not be made,
intentionally or unintentionally, the means of any misapprehension or misunderstanding as to tho relative position of the two
parties on this great question.
I listened, with a good deal of interest and attention, to the
historical narrative of my friend from Missouri [Mr. BLAND] in
relation to the measure which is now proposed for the consideration of the House. I noticed with much interest that he traced
it back to the act of 1792, a century ago, and that he undertook
to represent to this House that the act of 1792 was the model
upon which this bill was framed. That is a mistake. The act
of 1792 was an act for the coinage of gold and silver. The bill
now under consideration is an act for the unlimited issue of
paper money.
If the gentleman had carried his historical investigation a little
further back he would have found the model on which his bill is
based; and, sir, no personal modesty, no family modesty ought
to be allowed to obscure the light of history in the consideration
of an important question of legislation. I ask you, then, to go
back with,me nearly fifty years further, for this bill is not new
in principle and scarcely in form. It is older than this Government. It is a relic of the necessities and limitations of early colonial life. It is, I judge, an heirloom in the Bland family, and
dates back to 1748 when one Richard Bland was a leading member of the Houso of Burgesses of Virginia. He was a man of
character and standing; of patriotism and ability; but like his
distinguished namesake of to-day he seems to have been impressed and oppressed with the idea that the economic and financial system of the Government needed tinkering.
Tn those days the currency of Virginia consisted mainly of tobacco. Like silver it was cumbersome, weighty, and inconvenient. The unit of value seems to have been the hogshead, of
950 pounds; and the inconvenience which the average Virginia
gentleman of that day encountered in carrying about with him
the necessary number of hogsheads of tobacco to pay the ordinary expenses of a gentleman, naturally aroiised the desire and
inspired the ingenuity of the people to devise some more convenient system of currency, and it took shape in the Bland bill of
1748.
I ask your attention to that bill as furnishing the prototype,
almost the exact model, of the bill now before us. It provided
for the erection of Government warehouses, and placed Government inspectors in charge of them. Our bill utilizes the mints
already erected. That bill provided for the deposit in the Government warehouses by any person, be he Jew or Gentile, bond
X r free, cf any amount of tobacco. This bill provides for the de>
posit in the mints of the United States of the silver, of the bul-




5
lion, whether it be owned by an inhabitant of Europe, Asia,
Africa, or America.
For the tobacco deposited in those days in the Government warehouses which were in charge of officers called inspectors, it was
provided:

That said inspector*, or one of them, after they have viewed, examiner!,
and weighed the said tobacco according: to the directions of this act, shall hi
obliged to deliver to the person bringing the same as many promissory not.As
tinder the hands of said inspectors as shall be required for the full quantity
of tobacco received by them.

Our bill provides that—

The owner of the bullion may deposit the same at such mints and receive
therefore coin notes equal in amount to the coinage value of the bullion deposited.

The tobacco notes of Virginia were made legal tender for the
payment of all tobacco debts and receivable for certain public
dues and taxes, and provision was made for the punishment of
counterfeiting the same.
The notes provided for in the bill under consideration are to
be a legal tender and receivable for all public dues and taxes.
And, sir, the Legislature of the State of Virginia, by a supplement to this bill soon after passed, made a peculiar and frank
provision that'does not appear on the faca of this, our modern
imitation. It was provided, and I read from the act of Virginia,
the statutes at large of 1752:
That out of every hundred pounds of tobacco which shall be paid in discharge of quit-rents, secretaries, clerks, surveyors, or other officer's fees in
the counties hereafter mentioned, and so proportionably for a greater or
lesser quantity, there shall be the following abatements or allowances to the
payer; that is to say, for tobacco due in the counties of Culpeper and Cumberland, the person paying shall and may retain in his hands, thirty pounds
of tobacco for every hundred so due from him.

There is the principle of the pending bill; the debtor may retain in his hands 30 pounds out of every hundred due from him
and thus pay his debts with 70 cents on the dollar.
So long as bullion remains at its present price the provisions
of our bill are identical in effect—that the debtor may retain in
his hands 30 cents out of every 100, and pay with a dollar worth 70
cents only. But, sir, this is not the only precedent in the history
of Virginia, I wish the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. BLAND]
was in his seat, as this may be a matter of family history.
Let us go back a century further. In the early part of the
seventeenth century the hardy pioneers encountered the same
sort of embarrassment that confronts us to-day. They had an
overproduction of tobacco just as we have an overproduction of
silver. They proposed to remedy the evil by burning one-half
of the crop of tobacco. We propose to bury in the Treasury
vaults the whole crop of silver. But they deal with this question with a bluntness and a directness and a candor not apparent
in the pending bill. I read from the first volume of Henning's
Statutes of Virginia from the act of 1639, which is stated to be
" from the manuscript belonging to Thomas Jefferson, President
of the United States, which was purchased by him from the executor of Richard Bland, deceased."
ACT L.

Tobacco, by reason of excessive quantities made, being so low that the
planters could not subsist by it, or be enabled to raise more staple commodities or pay their debts, Enacted that the tobacco of that year be viewed
by sworn viewers, and the rotten and unmerchantable and half of the good
to be burned.

SIS




6
And further on it enacted, and X call your careful attention to
this, that " all creditors were to take 40 pounds for 100."
Here, sir, you have the germ of the very principle that is embodied in the Bland bill of to-day, " all creditors were to take 40
pounds for 100." W e propose to give the value of one dollar to
what, by the most reliable statistics, costs 40 cents produce, and
in the practical operation of this bill all creditors must take this
40 cents of cost, 70 cents of value, for 100.
That might be justified by the stern necessities of the infant
colony two hundred and fifty years ago, but it is not the kind of
morality, nor the kind of finance, nor the kind of law that we
want in this enlightened and prosperous and Christian age.
I have alluded to this, sir, merely for the purpose of supplementing the historical quotations of my friend from Missouri
[Mr. BLAND] and as a fair illustration and example of the logic
and inevitable result of this bill. I have thought it not entirely
uninteresting or uninstructive to trace its pedigree and to show
that in none of its features or principles is it new, but simply a
restatement, with diminished directness and candor, of schemes
and devices tried, used, and abandoned centuries ago.
Now, sir, as to its character and provisions. It is quoted
and alluded' to in this discussion as a free-coinago bill. I assert
that it is not a free-coinage bill. It is not intended to be a
free-coinage bill. To call it such is a misnomer and a deception.
The chairman of the committee will not rise in his place, nor
will any member of that committee rise, and say that they anticipate that under the operations of this bill one single dollar of
silver would be coined in your lifetime or mine. If they had desired a free-coinage bill, there were nine such bills before that
committee, that were exclusively and specifically free-coinage
bills, but everjr one of the nine rests in that committee to-day
and will rest till the last trump shall sound. The gentleman
from Virginia [Mr. EPES], who addi^essedus so eloquently yesterday, was the author of one of those bills. It was a free-coinage
bill pure and simple, but it never was reported and never will bo.
The pending bill provides simply for the unlimited purchase of
silver bullion, and the issuing of paper money therefor. Notice
the provision. It is very explicit—
The owner of the bullion may deposit the same at such mint and receive
therefor coin notes equal in amount to the coinage value of the bullion deposited, and the bullion thereupon shall become the property of the Government.

If that does not mean a purchase of the bullion, does not have
all the qualities and requisites of a purchase, then I am unable
to understand the English language. The provision of the bill
is simply for the unlimited purchase of silver and gold bullion,
but especially silver bullion, as that is the avowed purpose of the
bill, and the"issuo of Government notes therefor, at a price exceeding the market value by over 40 per cent, 129 cents for 90
cents of value.
Now, I submit, what necessity is there for any such legislation?
Does the Government of the United States need this bullion? Is
there any reason for its unlimited purchase. Is there any requirement of it for coinage? W e have 350,000,000 idle silver
dollars lying within the vaults of the Government and nearly $100,000,000 more of bullion, and are now adding to this at the rate of
between 6 and *l tons a day. Is there any use that more can be
* 218




7

put to? With the utmost effort we are able to keep in circulation only about 60,000,000 silver dollars. If the proposition was
made for the unlimited purchase of coal that is used on board
your ships, of iron that is used in their construction, or provisionsfor the Army or the Navy, or any commodity except silver, at
a price exceeding its market value, is there a man who would rise
on the floor of this House and defend such a measure?
What, then, is the excuse alleged for this unlimited purchase
of silver bullion? Why, they say 4 'we need more currency."
Is this true? Is there any lack of currency? Is there any necessity for more currency? The testimony of tho Director of
the Mint, taken before the Committee on Coinage at this session,
is that there is to-day in the banks of New York city $35,000,000
of idle money in excess of their lawful reserves; and the statistics submitted by the Secretary of the Treasury, and which I
have here, show you that we have in circulation over $1,600,000,000, or nearly $25 for every person; which is more currency than
of any other nation in this world except France. The currency
has constantly increased for the last twenty years. It has gone
on increasing year by year, in spite of all the alleged effects of
the act of 1873 and subsequent legislation. It has gone on at a
ratio greater than the increase of population, and at least equal
to the increase of business.
In 1873 we had in circulation, according to the official tables
which I hold in my hand,$751,881,809. pnMarch 1,1892 we had
$1,609,558,892. In 1873 the population was 41,077,000, and the
per capita circulation $18,0-1. To-day the population is estimated at 65.049,000, and the per capita circulation is $24.74. The
increase in our currency has outstripped the increase of population, and has fully kept pace with the development and increase
of business especially when we remember that with the development of banking and exchange facilities more than nine-tenths
of our business is done, as a matter of convenience and economy
of labor, by checks, drafts, and bills of exchange.
There is no complaint that we had too little currency in 1873.
Still less can it be claimed that there is a deficiency to-day. Currency is but a tool, an instrumentality for doing certain work,
that is the conduct of exchanges. When you have tools enough
for the work at hand a surplus helps no one. It is not the amount
of currency that is troubling us; it is the distribution of it, and
if any man will solve, or will take into serious consideration
the problem of how legitimately and fairly to prevent the accumulation of vast masses of idle wealth in single hands and secure a more general distribution he will be devoting himself to a
study worthy the attention of a statesman.
The amount of the currency is sufficient. What then? Why,
gentlemen say that a great crime was committed in 1873, when
silver was demonetized; that the policy of this nation for eighty
years was revolutionized. Is that true? If it is true, why do you
not propose to restore the act of 1873? Why do you not give us
an act simply for the coinage of metals, as we had in 1873, and
not undertake to foist upon us, under a false pretense, an unlimited issue of paper money? The act of 1873, as has been said,
simply dropped the silver dollar from the statute books as a recognition of an existing fact. Silver was not in circulation.
There is no man within the reach of my voice, I think, who
will stand up here and say that prior to 1878 he ever saw an
218




8
American silver dollar in circulation. It had passed out of the
use of ordinary life. It had been discredited twenty years before by a Democratic Administration. Gentlemen have passed
over that, or have hardly mentioned the fact that in 1853, under
the Administration of the sainted Franklin Pierce, the silver dollar was refused in payment of customs due to the United States,
and continued to be refused during- the whole twenty years from
1853 to 1873.
It had been discredited at Democratic hands and had passed
out of circulation. Add to that the fact that Thomas Jefferson,
as has already been said, in 1805, without authority of law, by an
exercise of arbitrary power, had closed the mints of the United
States and stopped the free coinage of the silver dollar, and that
they were kept closed for thirty years thereafter, and you have
got some Democratic responsibility for whatever may have been
done to the silver dollar.
It was not in 1873 an element in the financial situation. The
closing of the mints by Jefferson, the passage of the coin to other
countries, the fact that it had been discredited in the refusal to
receive it in payment of customs dues, and the effects of the war
had practically eliminated it from use for over sixty years preceding the act of 1873; and there is nothing, sir. in that act that imposed any outrage or any burden upon the silver-producing element or people of these United States.
Well, then, what was it? Why, they say that the result of
that act was to diminish the price of silver; that silver, which
vas $1.29, or perhaps nearer $1.32, an ounce at the passage of
that act, is worth to-day only 90 or 91 cents. That is true, but it
is not due to the act of 1873. It is due to the same influences, the
same powers, and the same laws that have brought down the
price of bituminous coal from $4.87 in 1873 to $2.60 in 1891. It is
the same influence that has brought the price of oil down from
$1.91 a barrel in 1873 to 67 cents in 1891.
It is the same thing, the same influence that has brought down
the price of pig iron and all commodities of which we have an
excessive and unlimited production. It is simply overproduction. Silver, which was produced to the amount of 27,000,000
ounces in 1873, reached the amount of 58,000,000 in 1891, and the
production of the articles which I have mentioned increased in
even a larger proportion.
It is simply the universal law of supply and demand which has
produced this result. Take as an illustration bituminous and
anthracite coal. The one is produced without limitation; the
other is practically limited in its production. The one increased
marvelously in its product, out of all proportion to the increase
in population, and hence of consumption, during those years.
The other increased iust about in the same proportion as the
population. The one" went down from $4.87 to $2.60 per ton; the
other, which had a limited output, increasing, as I have said, in
about the sams ratio as the increase of population, and hence of
demand, went only from $4.27 to $3.92i per ton. It is the operar
tion of the inexorable law of supply and demand which has produced the diminution in the price and value of silver.
But, sir, suppose it were true as claimed by the friends of the
bill, who is suffering by it? What is the reason for invoking
legislation by the United States Government? Who asks this legislation? If there is no diminution, but rather a great increase of
218




9
currency, if there is no lack of circulating medium,who is it that
is interested in having this legislation? Why, it is the power
that has maintained the lobby which has haunted these halls
and these committee rooms all winter. It is the silver-producing element in this country.
And, Mr. Speaker, to what consideration are they entitled?
By the best statistics, by statistics which can not'be disputed,
the ordinary average cost of producing an ounce of silver is from
51 to 52 cents, and they are selling it now in the markets of the
United States and in the markets of the world for 90 cents per
ounce. Is there any outrage, any difficulty, any hardship there?
Is not that a sufficient margin of profit?
When we read, as we may read in the ordinary current imports
of mining stocks, that these great silver-mining companies, like
the one whose report I have in my hand, have piled up and distributed to their stockholders in eleven months $1,350,000 in
dividends; when another one, an historic representative mining
company, has distributed over $11,000,000 in dividends from an
investment of $46,500; when we examine these statistics we shall
be forced to the conclusion that there is nothing in the condition
of the silver-mining industry that demands the special attention, consideration, or favor of this nation.
Why, sir, I was interested, and possibly this House may be interested in reading in the Engineering and Mining Journal of
October 24,1891, a letter writteii by my friend from Nevada, the
able Representative from that State upon this floor, descriptive
of the condition of affairs in the mining sections of this nation
whose representatives are asking our interposition in their favor
to-day. He says:
Every miner in tlie employ of JOHN P. JONES or any other mine owner,
either in Virginia City or Gold Hill, is paid §4 a day for eight hours' work.
Men working above ground receive from $3.50 to $4. There is no departure
from these rates.
With one day's wages the miner can buy 100pounds of the hest flour in the
world; or 7 bushels of the tlnest potatoes ever grown; or 32 pounds of choice
beef; or 32 pounds of prime butter, and almost everything else in proportion.
With the product of a month's labor he can pay his board at a first-class restaurant, and have $94 left.
I ask you in all candor how that compares with the condition of the miner
or the factory hand in New York or Pennsylvania,where the employers gen*
erally express so much horror and indignatian at the thought of the laboring
man being paid in "80-cent dollars?"
The Comstock miner thinks nothing of spending $50 for a day's amusement
at a picnic. This may not be suggestive of rigid economy, but it certainly
does not Indicate that he is being shamefully wronged by his employer.
There are, no doubt, some poor people there; sickness and misfortune invade every community.

Mr. Speaker, is there anything in the condition of these people
who can save $94 out of one month's wages, boai^ding in the mean
time at the best restaurants, and who can afford to spend $50 at
a single picnic, is there anything in the condition of the laboring
men of that limited section of our country that demands our special interposition? Is there anything in the condition of the
owners of a mine from which they can accumulate $11,000,000 in
a few years and distribute among themselves, and who can produce silver at a cost of 51 cents an ounce and sell it for 90 cents,
that demands your interposition or your favor? No, sir.
You must find some other excuse than the lack of currency or
the depression of the mining interests of this nation to justify
this legislation. What is it then? Why, it is intimated, and it
was stated with a good deal of shrewdness and some degree of
218




10
cunning before the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures, by an eminent advocate of this bill, that the result of its
enactment into law would be to scale down the indebtedness of
our people.
And, Mr. Speaker, as a fact behind all these sophistries, behind
all this declamation, behind all the appeals to predjudiee and all
this talk about "gold-bugs," behind everything that has been
injected into this discussion, the fact is that there is a class, represented here, who are looking for some device by which an
honest debt of 100 cents can be paid with 70 cents. If we are willing, if we are ready, to legislate on that basis and for that purpose, then possibly "this legislation may be justified. If we are
ready to scale down the ordinary debts of the American people
and provide for their payment at less than their face value, possibly this legislation may be defended, for it will undoubtedly
have that effect.
Mr. DAVIS. Will the gentleman permit a question?
Mr. CHARLES W . STONE. Yes, sir.
Mr. DAVIS. Did our present debt come into existence on gold
loans?
Mr. CHARLES W . STONE. I will speak to the gentleman
about gold loans in a moment. I want to call attention now to
the fact that the debts which will be affected by this legislation
are not the debts of the men who hold the bonds of this nation.
They are the debts of the common working people; they are the
debts of the masses. If I have a neighbor who comes to me and
wants to borrow $100, and I am fortunate enough to have it, and
I lend it to him and take his note, that note is to be scaled down.
The deposits of the laboring man, of the widow, of the artisan,
in the savings banks of this nation are to be scaled down; the
wages of the laborer (for the laborer is a creditor every day in
the month except pay day) the wages of the laborer are to be
scaled down; the receipts of the pensioner are to be scaled down,
if there is any scaling in this business. But, I tell you, gentlemen, that debts due to the bondholders are not affected as a rule.
As the gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. WILLIAMS] said
yesterday and as the gentleman from Arizona [Mr. SMITH] admitted, the effect of the present situation is that bonds payable
in gold can be negotiated in the markets of this country and of
the world on a very much more favorable basis than bonds not
payable in gold. And the gentleman from Arizona gave you his
view of the reason. He said it was on account of some mythical
silver legislation or legislation affecting the coinage of this country in the past.
That was his opinion. I concede that he is honest in holding
it. I presume that he came to this conclusion by meditating on
the subject among the mountains and along the streams of Arizona; that he had possibly learned it from his neighbor across
the line in the Mexican silver-using country; but I will put
against that the testimony of a man from whose private letter
I will read to you in a moment—a man who has made this question a study; whose daily business entitles him to have an opnion
and express it—an intelligent opinion.
Let me read you lust one sentence from a letter which I have
here from Henry Clews [laughterj; and there is no better judge
of the effects of financial legislation. Gentlemen may laugh;
they may say he is a banker, a broker: but he is a man who deals
218




u
in these securities, who buys and sells them for others; who has
an opinion, and the requisite knowledge and experience and
means of observation on which to base an intelligent opinion.
He knows what he is writing about. I am going to give you his
opinion. You may sneer at it or you may indorse jfc; but I say
that the judgment of a man who has been devoting time and attention and study to this question, who is earning his daily bread
by his knowledge on this subject, is at least equal in value to
theories drawn from the mountains of Arizona or the plains of
Kansas. Mr. Clews, writing under date of March 17,1892, says:
All the recent issues of bonds are being made payable, principal and interest, in gold, owing to the silver scare and the agitation of free silver so
frequently in Congress.

That is his opinion. I put it against the opinion of the gentleman from Arizona. And I wish to repeat what I said a moment
ago, that while you may scale down the debts of the ordinary
man, of your neighbor, of the depositor in yoursavings bank, of
the pensioner, of the men who have not the shrewdness and
sagacity to provide that the debts due to them Bhall be payable
in gold, you will not scale down the claims of the bondholders,
because they are shrewd and have made, and are making provision for their protection. Let me read to you on this question
from a letter of Drexel & Co., of Philadelphia:
Mr. DAVIS. More Wall street testimony. Wall street is on
top.
Mr. CHARLES W . STONE. I am giving my Alliance friends
this testimony, because it is the most reliable testimony on this
question, just as I would give the testimony of my friends from
Kansas as reliable in relation to any question in regard to the
production of corn, or possibly the burning of corn, in the State
of Kansas, because they know something of the subject, and
have occasion to know it from daily study of it.
Mr. SIMPSON. I suppose you would except our friend PuNSTON!

Mr. CHARLES W . STONE. When I am dealing with questions of finance I want the opinions, the results of the observations and experience of financiers, and there can be no better
authority, no safer and more conservative statement of facts,
which no man on this floor will dispute, than I hold in my hand.
I give you the language of Drexel < Co.;
fe
It is almost Impossible to sell any bond in which there is no contract to
pay both principal and interest in gold. Almost the first question that ie
asked us by an investor is, " i s this a gold bond?" I think it pretty safe to
assume that fully 90 per cent of all the bonds issued during the past ten years,
whether city, State, or railroad, have been gold bonds, as otherwise they
could not have been marketed.

Ninety per cent of the great bonded indebtedness of this country can not bo reached by this bill—can not be scaled down. If
gentlemen are anxious to go into the scaling business—if thoy
are anxious to give the sanction of this Government to any theory
that has simply for its object the devising of an easy way for
paying honest debts with less than honest dollars, such legislation can not affect the great body of the bondholders of this
country.
Mr. SIMPSON. If we secure
Mr. CHARLES W. STONE. The gentleman must excuse me;
lean not give way for any interruption. I have promised to
yield a portion of my time; I am anxious to get through in order
to keep that contract.
SIS




12
Sir, I am impressed with the moral aspects of this question.
The people of this country as a whole are honest and in favor of
honest government on honest principles. No man or party can
successfully appeal to them on any other basis. The nation
never repudiated its debts in whole or in part, and it will not
be the potent factor in any scheme to enable individuals to repudiate theirs in whole or in part. We want honest money, worth
just as much next year as this, and no more. The debtor should
pay and the .creditor is entitled to receive just what is loaned,
in value as well as amount, and tho risk of depreciation of currency will always rest heaviest ultimately on the borrower, for
the lender will mold his contract for his own protection from
loss by reason of possible depreciation of cux*rency.
But we are told that the silver dollar of to-day, whatever its
intrinsic value, will buy 100 cents' worth of commodities, of
bread, of meat, of whatever we need; and if so, it is good enough,
and the more we have the better. This is plausible as addressed
to the individual, and true within certain limits. Our silver
dollar has to-day,within our own boundaries, a commercial value
of 30 cents more than its intrinsic value, but it has it only because,
and will retain it only so long as the Government sustains it by
a practical redemption in gold when demanded. It is not the
die nor the mold nor any necromancy in the process of coinage
that gives to 371 grains of silver a commercial value largely in
excess of its real value.
It is not the stamp upon the coin, but the Government behind
it—its pledge of redemption, its solemnly-declared purpose, emblazoned on our statute books, to maintain the parity of its gold
and silver coinage that fixes and holds the value of the cheaper
motal. Withdraw that support, as you do if you flood the country with silver in excess of the power of the Government to redeem with its stock of gold, and the moment it ceases to be exchangeable for gold it sinks to its intrinsic value and the 70-cent
dollar is a reality instead of an apprehension. This will not do.
The dollar of the American people must be an honest dollar,
and whether it be white or yellow or green it must be worth
100 cents and always exchangeable for any other American dollar.
Now, Mr. Speaker, a single further allusion and I am done.
Mr. DAVIS. That large " scaling-down " process strikes us
in Kansas quite hard, and I would like the gentleman to go further into that.
Mr CHARLES W . STONE. I have already explained to the
gentleman why I did not feel, under the circumstances, and with
the obligations I have already assumed, able to go further into
that now, and so I must decline.
I want to say just this, that the gentleman from Missouri has
cited, and cited properly, certain utterances by the former eminent Secretary of the Treasury, Mr. Windom, and I think it not
improper that in the same connection I allude to and read a brief
extract from the dying words of the late Secretary, which express his final conclusions as the result of a lifetime of study and
thought upon this subject.
- Let me read a few words from the utterance of Secretary Windom, coming from him within a few moments of his death, addressed to the American people. He says:
Believing that there is not enough of either gold or silver in the world to
meet the necessities of business, X am an earnest bimetallism and concede to
218




13
no one a stronger desire than I feel for the free and unlimited coinage of silver as soon as conditions can he reached, through international agreement
or otherwise, by which such coinage shall be safe: but it is my iirm conviction that for this country to enter upon that experiment now, under existing
conditions, would be extremely disastrous, and would result, not in bimetallism but in silver monometallism. Such an experiment would, in my judgment, prove a greater disappointment to its advocates than to anyone else.

And because the gentleman from Missouri quoted an eminent
French authority, Oernuschi, an avowed bimetallist and champion of silver, I want to read two lines from his testimony befofe
the Silver Commission in 1876:

Q. "Why not adopt bimetallism in France, and let Germany do as Bhe
pleases?
A. Because in that case all the silver would come to France. In my opinion no country can coin silver alone.

Now, sir, .1 submit, as in line with these authorities, and as establishing and setting forth the views of the friends of silver,
eminent bimetallists in other countries as well as eminent bimetallists in this country, certain citations of authority and expressions of opinion.
I read from the statement of Prof. Francis A. Walker, author of work on " Money," before the Committee on Coinage, in
1891:
For fourteen years I have been an earnest and consistent advocate of the
restoration of silver to its rank as a money metal of full legal-tender powers. and there is scarcely a political result which is conceivable, likely to
take place within any reasonable term of time, which would bring me greater
joy than the union of the United States with the principal commercial nations of Europe, in establishing the free coinage of silver upon a common
ratio. But the present measure, it seems to me, is a menace to that very object, and it is especially as a bimetallist, a consistent and earnest bimetallist,
that I have felt called upon to say a word in question of the present measure.
I confess that I can not conceive how any man who has largely studied the
question can believe, can even hope, that the United States can go it alone in
this matter of silver coinage; can undertake to do so without coming to
speedy grief and humiliation. I am very well aware that many gentlemen do
honestly so hope and so believe, but the overwhelming preponderance of the
educatedfinancialopinion of the world inclines to the belief that the proposed measure would simply result in stripping us of our gold, in upsetting
our exchanges with the great trading and producing nations of the world, in
bringing us down to the level of second rate financial powers only, such as
China, India, and South America, and in involving our trade and production
in all the evils, the inexpressible evils of a depreciated and fluctuating currency.

In 1881, Mr. Forssell, the delegate of Sweden to the International Monetary Conference, said:

It is the opinion even of the boldest bimetallist that the obligations corresponding to the salutary liberties of the free mintage of both metals would
henceforth be unbearable without the cooperation of all or of most of the firstclass states: that the heedless state which would undertake alone the necessary efforts for rehabilitating and sustaining the value of silver would be
crushed under the weight of the bimetallic system,which would at once fall to
pieces; that it would be suffocated by the silver flowing in from the whole
world.

Mr. Pierson, delegate of the Netherlands, said:
Gresham's law is doubtless opposed to the establishment of the bimetallic
system in a small group of states, but not to its establishment on a territory
embracing the most civilized countries of the world.

Mr. Magriin, the delegate from France, said:
In order that the metal silver may recover its former value it is indispensable that it should be, as in the past, freely coined side by side with gold, and
as no state either wishes to stand or could stand alone in resuming such
coinage, it is absolutely certain that we shall not find our way out of the
present difficulties until an international bimetallic treaty shall have been
concluded.

Mr. G. M. Boissevain, winner of the prize on bimetallism of218




14
fered by Sir H. M. Meysey Thompson at the Paris Monetary
Conference, 1889, and a zealous silver advocate, says:
Lastly, in the third place, I reply—and this especially is of very great Importance—that nothingbutinternationalbimetallismcan assure the stability
of the ratio of value between the two metals, nor reestablish the unity of the
money standard in the commercial world.

As indicating the present drift of European sentiment, I desire
to read the following dispatch from the New York Tribune of
Tuesday, March 16.1892:
VIENNA, March 14.

Prof. Milewslti, of the Cracow University, was examined by the currency
commission to-day. He said he felt bound to demand that the Government
should take the initiative step toward arriving at an international bimetallic agreement. In ease such an agreement should prove impossible, he added,
Austria and Hungary ought not to attempt any definite solution of the question, but ought to confine themselves to reforming the present coinage by
the purchase of gold.

Hon. E. O. Leech, Director of the Mint, before the House Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures, Washington, D. C.f
February 3,1892, stated as follows:
Q. In your judgment, what would be the effect of opening our mints to the
free and unlimited coinage of silver upon the adoption of a bimetallic standard by the leading countries of the world.
A. I think it would seriously embarrass the consideration of that subject,
which at present is in very fair shape.
Q. What is the view, if you know, of leading advocates of bimetallism in
the leading European countries as to the effect of opening the mints of the
United States, independent of any agreement with any other nation?
A. Without exception they are all of the opinion, and have so expressed
themselves, that it would be disastrous to the cause. All the economfsts and
writers on silver in Europe have expressed that opinion.
Q. To your knowledge, is there any difference of opinion among the leading and eminent advocates of bimetallism in European countries on that
point?
A. I do not know of one who does not hold that view.

These authorities all concur in the conclusion that neither the
United States nor any other nation can alone sustain bimetallism
on the basis of the free coinage of silver, and that such attempt
can only result in a monometallic and exclusively silver currency.
We can not single-handed and alone lift up the vast mass of the
existing and constantly increasing world's product of silver. It
can only be done by international agreement, a consummation
which the passage of this bill would seriously retard.
And now, sir, in conclusion 1 desire only to say that as I look
at this question, stripped of its rhetoric, stripped of the appeal
to passion and prejudice, youmust concede that the effect of this
bill will be to have one of two results; either it will result in
bringing upon us the vast deposits and stores of silver of the
world or it will not. It must have one or the other of these two
effects. If it brings upon us the silver of Europe, the silver of
the other nations, then the conclusion is not a violent one, but a
logical and irresistible one, that we must inevitably be swamped
by the influx of this vast mass of the silver of the Old World;
that gold will be driven out; that business will be disarranged;
that we will be reduced to the position of an exclusively silverusing monometalist nation.
I am not going to enlarge upon that. It is the natural and the
inevitable result of law, and whether you may call it Gresham's
law, or whatever you call it, its operation is certain and irresistible. There is no escape from it. If this silver from the other
nations of the world does come here it will inevitably drive out
and take the place of gold. It will reduce us to the basis of a
218




15
stiver-using nation, and range us commercially with Mexico,
India and China,
If, on the other hand, as gentlemen argue upon this floor, the
silver of other countries does not come here, then tho only result
of this hill will be to give to the silver producers of this country for their entire product, which for its market value depends
upon the commercial and market price of silver, and is now 90
cents an ounce, it will give to them instead of to the United
States Government the margin between the market price and
the coinage value of the silver.
This is a donation which you have no right, moral or legal, to
make. It will result, at the present market price, in taking from
the Treasury of this nation from $13,000,000 to $14,000,000 every
year, by compelling us to pay $1.29 for what we now buy for 90
cents. So that, take either horn of this dilemma, either upon
the basis that the silver of other countries will come here or that
it will not, the provisions of this bill are indefensible.
ADDENDA.
Statement from report of the Secretary of the Treasury showing the amount of the
currency of the United States on July 1, 1873, and March J, 1892.
JULY 1, 1873.

[Population, 41,677,000; circulation per capita, $18.04,1
General
stock, coined
or issued.

Add specie in circulation on the Pacific coast...
-

Amount
in circulation.

81,379,184
44,799,365
356,000,000
347,267,061

State bank notes
Fractional currency
United States notes
National-bank notes

In Treasury.

$6,723,360
7,535,855
8,304,586

$1,379,184
38,076,005
348,464,145
338,962,475

749,445,610

22,563,801

726,881,809
25,000,000
751,881,809

MARCH 1, 1892.

General
stock, coined In Treasury.
or issued.
$606,661,364 $198,847,863
Gold coin
Standard silver dollars.. 412,184,740 352,920,220
14,787,832
77,096,549
Subsidiary silver
18,150,140
178,151,419
Gold certificates
3,280,157
328,421,343
Silver certificates
Treasury notes, act July
9,517,659
85,236,212
18,1890
346,681,016
24,549,328
United States notes
C u r r e n c y certificates,
90,000
29,440,000
act June 8, 1872
4,792,427
172,621,875
National-bank notes
Total

2,236,494,518

Amount
Amount
in circula- in circulation March tion March
1, 1891.
1, 1892.
$407,813,501
59,264,520
62,308,717
160,001,279
325,141,186
75,718,553
322,131,688
29,350,000
167,829,448

$•108,752,874
63,563,553
57,345,638
147,119,129
303,822,259
28,871,279
| 340,274,851
168,692,736

626,935,656 :1,609,558,892 1,518,439,319

Population of the United States March l, 1832, estimated at 65,049,000; circulation per capita, $24.74.
Gold bullion in Treasury March 1,1892, $83,275,529.
Silver bullion in Treasury March 1, 1892, $61,401,457.
218




16
Table of circulation and population by years, from the report of the Secretary of
the Treasury.
Amount
of money in
United States.

Year.
I860
1861
1862
1863
1864
1865
1866
1867
1868
....
1869
1870.....
1871
1872
1873
1874
1875.J
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1834..
1885..
1886
1887
1888
1889
1890
1891
1892, Mar.

Amount in
circulation.

Population.

$442,102,477
452,005,767
405,'767
334,697,744
358,452,079
674,867,283 '
595,394,038
705,588,067
669,641,478
770,129,755
714,702,995
673,488,244
754,327,254
728,200,612
661,992,069
680,103,661
716,553,578
664,452,891
715,351,180
722,868,461
675,212,794
715,889,005
741,812,174
762,721,565
738,309,549
751,881,809
774,445,610
806,024,781
776,083,031
754,101,947
798,273,509
790, G83,284
727,609,388
722,314,883
763,053,847
791,253,576
729,132,634
818,631,793
1,051,521,541
973,382,228
1.205,929,197
1,114,238,119
1,406,541,823
1,480,531,719
1,174,290,419
1,643,489,816
1,230,'305,696
1,705,454,189
1,243,925,969
1,292,568,615
1,817,658,336
1,252,700,525
1,808,559,694
1,900,442,672
1,317,539,143
1,372,170,870
2,062,955,949
2,075,350,711
1,380,361,649
1,429,251,270
2,144,226,159
2,195,224,075
1,497,440,707
2,235,494,518
1,609; 558,892

31,443,321
32,064,000
32,704,000
33,365,000
34,046,000
34,748,000
35,469,000
36,211,000
36,973,000
37,75G, 000
38,588,371
39,555,000
40,596,000
41,677,000
42,796,000
43,951,000
45,137,000
46,353,000
47,598,000
48,866,000
50,155,783
51,316,000
52,495,000
53,693,000
54,911,000
56,148,000
57,404,000
58,680,000
59,974,000
61,289,000
62,622,250
63,975,000
65,049,000

Money
per
capita.

Circulation per
capita.

$14.06
14.09
10.96
20.23
20.72
22.16
21.27
20.11
19.38
18.95
J 8.73
18.75
18.70
18.58
18.83
18.16
17.52
16.46
16.62
21.52
24.04
27.41
28.20
30.60
31.06
32.37
31.50
32.39
34.39
33.86
34.24
34.31

SI 3.85
13.98
10.23
17.81
19.67
20.57
18.99
18.28
18.39
17.60
17.50
18.10
18.19
18.04
18.13
17.16
16.12
15.58
15.32
16.75
19.41
21.71
22.37
22.91
22.65
23.02
21.82
22 45
22! 88
22.52
22.82
23.41
24.74
;

Table fromthe report of the Director of the Mint, showing product of silver from
the mines in the United States, 1873-1891.
Fine
ounces.

Calendar year.
1873
1874

t

1876....
1877.
1878
1880
1881
18S2._
1883
188-1
1885
1886
1887

----....
r.

1[
:

ISS9IIIIIIIIZIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIZI1IZIIIIII

1890

218




27,650,000
28.849,000
24,518,000
30,009,000
30,783,000
31,96X 000
31,550,000
30,320,000
33,260,000
36,200,000
35,730,000
37,800,000
39,910,000
39,440,000
41,260,000
45,780,000
50,000,000
54,500,000
58,000,000

* Estimated.

O

Commercial
value.
135.750,030
36,869,000
30,549,000
34,690.000
36,970, O O
O
40,270,000
35,430,000
31,720,000
37,850,000
41,120,000
39, mo. 000
42. oro, 000
42,500,000
39,230,000
40,410,000
43,020,000
46,750.000
57,225; O D
O
57,304,000

Coining
value.
$35,750,000
37,300,000
31,700,003
38,800,000
39,800,000
45,200,0C0
40,800,000
39,200,000
43,000,000
46,800,000
46,200.000
48,800,000
51,600,000
51,000,000
53,350,000
59,195,000
64, t>46,4&4
70.4&4,645
74,989,898