View original document

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

We are proud of oar country, and proud of its credit. What has been the basis
of its credit? That this country has not permitted its currency to depreciate and
that it lias paid all its obligations in the best kind of money. The policy lias been
to keep each kind of a dollar in its debt paying power equal to each other kind.
1 do not believe in discrediting the Government by resorting to legislation of
doubtful propriety. It is to the highest interest of the entire country, and especially of the new States, that a high credit should be maintained. We are a new
country. We have to borrow money to develop the resources of the young States.
We want the confidence of the people who have the money to loan. >Ve do not
•want to drive the invested capital out of the States of the West.





Wednesday and Thursday, March 14 and 15,1894



S P E E C H


M. C A R E Y .

Wednesdayy March 14,189%.
The Senate having under consideration the hill (H. R. 4956) directing the
coinage of the silver bullion held in the Treasury, and for other p u r p o s e s -

Mr. CAKEY said:
Mr. P R E S I D E N T : I shall vote againBt the pending bill. My
vote will be consistent with the votes that I have given heretofore on the silver question.
At the commencement of this session of Congress the Secretary of the Treasury made certain recommendations as to the
financial legislation which he deemed necessary. Fortunately
there was no excuse in his case to say that he was under the influence of Wall street. A charge that is common when the recommendations of a Secretary are not in accord with the convictions of some of us. He comes from a great central State. He
had been elected to the House of Representatives seven times.
He had been honored by an election as Speaker of that body
three times. At the time he was selected as Secretary of
the Treasury he was a member of the Senate. Unlike many
of the Secretaries of the Treasury who had preceded him, he
had devoted most of his life to public duties. He had made a
great reputation as a representative from his State, especially
in matters pertaining to financial and revenue matters. No one
of any political party doubts his integrity or great ability. His
views are entitled to great consideration, yet I doubt whether
the recommendations of any Secretary has been so little heeded.
In his first annual report he stated the condition of the public
Treasury, and what he considered would be its condition as to
receipts, deficits, etc. He appealed to Congress for assistance to
maintain the gold reserve and to procure sufficient money to pay
the ordinary expenses of the Government. "He stated in the
clearest language possible that the remedy was in the hands of
Congress, when he said:
Congress alone has the power to adopt such measures as will relieve the
present situation and enable the Treasury to continue the punctual payment of all legitimate demands upon it, and I respectfully but earnestly
urge that immediate attention be given to the subject.

The Secretary of tl^e Treasury went further and said that
nothing except a great financial emergency would justify him
in issuing bonds under the resumption act.
I believe-it to be the first and the highest duty of a Secretary
of the Treasury to maintain the credit of this country. I believe if the Senator from Oregon [Mr. MITCHELL] was made
Secretary of the Treasury, or if the Senator from Mississippi


[Mr. GEORGE] was called to the office, each would feel it to be
his duty to use every means in his power to protect and maintain the credit of the United States.
Mr. GEORGE. The Senator from Mississippi would feel it
his first duty, if he were Secretary of the Treasury or Secretary
of anything else, to obey the law of the land.
Mr". CAREY. Let us see what the Secretary said. I will read
from his annual renort:
In the present condition of the public credit nothing le3s than the existence of a great and pressing financial emergency would, in my opinion, justify the Issue and sale of any of these classes of bonds. On the first class the
interest would amount, at the maturity of the bonds, to one-half the principal; on the second class it would amount to more than two-thirds of the
principal, and on the third class it would exceed the principal by 20 per cent.
If any one of these methods of raising money were now presented as an original measure for consideration in Congress, I am satisfied it would not receive the approval of that body or of the people.
Whatever may have been their merits nearly a quarter of a century ago,
when the credit of the Government was to a certain extent impaired by the
existence of a large interest-bearing public debt and the general use of a depreciated paper currency, not then redeemable in any kind of coin, our
financial standing is now so high that our public obligations, bearing any
of the rates of interest authorized by the law referred to, would have to be
sold at a premium so great as to prevent large classes of our people, who
might otherwise invest in them, from becoming purchasers. The United
States 4 per cent bonds, payable in 1907, are now selling at a rate which
yields investors less than 3 per cent upon their cost, and 1 am confident that
a bond, bearing interest at the rate of 3 per cent, payable quarterly, and redeemable at the option of the Government after five years, could be readily
sold at par in our own country.
If the authority now existing should be so modified as to empower the
Secretary of the Treasury to issue the bonds in denominations or sum£ of
$25 and its multiples, they could be readily disposed of through the subtreasuries and post-offlces without the agency or intervention of banks or
other financial institutions, and without the payment of commissions.
Such bonds would afford to the people at large an opportunity to convert their
surplus earnings into a form of security which, while it would be perfectly
safe, would not only increase in value by reason of accumulating interest,
but be at all times available as a means of procuring money when needed;
and the experience of this and other countries justifies the confident belief
that such a plan would be popular and successful.
In case Congress should not consider it advisable to authorize the Secretary to use, for the purpose of supplying deficiencies in the revenues, any
part of the proceeds or the bonds herein suggested. I recommend that he be
empowered to execute from time to time, as may be necessary, the obligations of the Government, not exceeding in the aggregate $50,000,000, bearing
a rate of interest not greater than 3 percent and payable after one year from
date, and that he be permitted to sell them at not less than par, or use them
at not less than par. in the payment of public expenses to such creditors as
may be willing to receive them. The condition of the Treasury is such that
unless some available means are promptly provided by law for supplying
the growing deficiency, the public service will be seriously impaired and pensioners and other creditors subjected to great delay and inconvenience.

Mr. CAREY. I suppose the Secretary of the Treasury could
have refused to pay the debts of the Government, but he did
not do that. In January he wrote a letter to the chairman
of the Committee on Finance in which in appealing language
he asked that the resumption law be amended so that he might
be authorized to issue bonds :md take care of the credit of this
country. He even went so far with that letter as to send into
the Senate the form of a bill. The chairman of that committee
did not introduce the bill. The bill of the Secretary proposed
to amend the resumption act by providing that he could use certain funds derived from the sale of bonds in paying the ordinary
expenses of the Government. Among other things the Secretary said:
It will appear from this statement that the coin reserve has been reduced
to $74,108,149, and it is evident from the condition of the Treasury that the


Department will have no means to defray the ordinary expenses of the Government unless a large part of the payments are hereafter made out of that
fund. If this is done, the coin reserve will be reduced by the 1st of February to about $66,601,864, a sum wholly inadequate for the purposes for which
it was created.
On account of this critical condition of the Treasury, I have considered it
my duty, in addition to the earnest recommendations contained in my annual report, to appear twice before your committee and after full explanations of the situation urge prompt legislative action on this subject. With
the permission of the committee, I have prepared and presented for its consideration a bill which,tif promptly passed, would, in my opinion, meet all
the requirements of the situation by providing the necessary means for defraying the public expenses and replenishing the coin reserve to such an
extent as to assure the maintenance of the parity of all forms of United
States currency.

The United States from its very foundation, unlike most other
countries, has been a debt-paying nation. I t is true that only
once in its history has it been entirely out of debt, but from the
formulating- of apian to pay th^ public debt by Alexander Hamilton up to the present time, we find the policy of this Government has been as rapidly as possible to reduce its debt—a policy
which in its three wars has made the n ition able to protect its
credit. Let us look at the facts from history. The tables published by the Secretary of the Treasury show the public debt
soon after the close of the Revolutionary war to have been
about $(5,000,000. The debt varied but little from this amount
until the year 1807. Then the debt was reduced to $69,000,000.
The reductions were then rapid until the breaking out of the
war of lbl2. That war led to an increase of the indebtedness.
It 'reached what then appeared to be an enormous sum, $127,000,000. The reductions then again were rapid until 1823 or
1824, when there was a marked increase, but the tendency of
the debt was downward until it was wiped out in 1835 during the
Administration of President Jackson. This was accomplished
because of the large sales of public land.
Another debt was immediately created, which fluctuated much
until the breaking out of the Mexican war, when the debt was materially increased. A marked reduction was shown in the years
1853, 1854. 1S55, and 18 >0. New tariff legislation at that time
caused again a marked increase in the public debt, andeich year
during Mr. Buchanan's Administration there was ati increase of
the public indebtedness to the amount of about $20,0^)0,000.
Then came the civil war and the creation of the great debt.
The expenditures of the Government for the fiscal years 1803
and 18fH were more than the entire expenditures from the foundation of the Government to that time. The four years of war required $2,000,0( 0.0 ;0 more than the National Treasury had received before during its entire existence, and it was compelled
to pay out in interest in one year no less than the sum of $150,000,000, an amount double the expenses of any year previous to
the war time.
The credit of the Government at the commencement of the
civil war was at its lowest ebb. The conditions were such that
no one wanted to loan money to the Government, and from first
bonds sold the Government realized only 81) cents on the dollar.
In 18 we find an interest-bearing debt of $ >,77(i,U0U,000. It 1892
it had been reduced to $S41,0G0,0t0. The interest, from $1 HO,000,000 in 1805, had been reduced to $33,000,000 in 1889. During the
Harrison Administration, by the purchase of bonds with surplus
revenues and by extending of bonds at 2 per cent interest per

annum, the annual interest charges were reduced to about $2*5,000,000. At this point the Government's credit may be said to
have reached the highest point in the history of the country.
The policy cf the Republican party from its organization has
been not only to pay the current expenses of this Government,
b a t us rapidly as possible to reduce the war debt and the interest thereon; not forgetting, however, to repeal as quickly as
possible internal-revenue laws which were necessary in time of
war, but obnoxious to the people in time of peace. #
The war revenue laws were found in 188^ to bring larger sums
of money into the Treasury than were really necess iry. So important changes were made in 1883 in the tariff and also in the
internal-revenue laws. These changes showed a reduction of
$30,000,000 for the first year after the passage of the law. The
revenues rapidly increased and were soon very much larger than
were expected or apprehended. They increased year after year
until we come to the time when it was proposed to revise the
tariff for the purpose of reducing the revenues of the Government. The McKinlev act was passed. It reduced the'revenues
from a total of $403,000,000 in 1890 to $354,000,000 in 1892, or about
Under the McKinley act there was a marked increase of receipts for the fiscal year 1893, and the revenues continued to
grow until the season of the present depression commenced. It
is but just to state that if we go back and follow the panics of
this country or the long seasons of business depression we will
find that the revenues have invariablysfallen off during such
periods. Those in authority have always found honorable ways
to meet the deficiencies and to pay the debts of the Government
in times of emergencies. If the present depression in the business of the country had not occurred, there would have been
abundant revenues under the McKinley act to have met all the
wants and demandsof the Government, including pension appropriations and such funds as are required for public improvements.
The statements ot the Treasury have for several months
shown increasing falling off of the revenues and an increasing
deficit. The Secretary of the Treasury was forced to do that
which he protested against doing in December, namely, issue
bonds under a law which should have been considered obsolete.
If Congress had done its duty, I believe it would promptly have
amended the resumption law as suggested by the Secretary, so
that he would have been clothed with the necessary power to
increase the reserve of the Treasury and meet the deficits of
the revenues under a law applicable to the present condition of
the times.
If the bonds could have been issued under the law amended as
suggested and sola at par, there is no doubt whatever that
such a loan as would have req uired to bridge over the present
difficulties could have floated at i per cent per annum. Secretary of the Treasury Foster had extended United States bonds
at 2 per cent per annum, and that, too, on an option as to redemption that was entirely with the Government, while the Carlisle bonds have been issued for a fixed term of ten years, which
should have made them far more valuable. In other words, the
United States will have lost in the ten years of interest on the
$50,000,000 of bonds sold on a basis of 3 per cent per annum, at

least 1 per cent per annum, or in round numbers $500,000 per annum, or a total in the ten years of $5,000,000.
It is now estimated that the deficit for the current year will
reach $80,000,0t0. It may be as great as $100,000,000.
There is an abundance of money in the country. I t is accumulating in the banks unused; ordinarily it seeks investment in
Government bonds. When the Government issues bonds it
should make them of that character that are most desired by
the people,'so as to secure the highest fi gures when sold and at the
lowest rate of interest. We heard much in the Senate in advance
of the issue of these bonds about the intense earnestness of the
banking institutions. It was represented that they were using all
their power to induce the Secretary of the Treasury to issue
those bonds. It is well known that the Secretarv of the Treasury had to use no small amount of eloquence to induce the bankers to buy the bonds. The bonds were most undesirable for investment. The bonds draw 5 per cent interest, but had to be
sold enough above par to net the purchaser but 3 per cent per
annum. It will, hereafter,for a period of ten years, appear that
the Government is paying 5 per cent interest on a loan; something that has not occurred before for a number of years.
This Government has the n e c e s s a r y resources to meet its liabilities. I do not believe in discrediting the Government by resorting to legislation of doubtful propriety. It is to the highest
interest of the entire country and especially of the new States
that a high credit should be maintained. We are a new country.
We have to borrow money to develop the resources of the young
States. We want the confidence of the people who have the
money to lo rn. We do not want to drive the invested capital
out of the States of the West.
I wish to call attention to an important table which I have before me. It by a comparison of the debts of several of the prominent nations of the world, including the United States in 1865
and also in 1890, tells a remarkable story:


Austria-Hu ngary.
Great Britain
Turkey, Europe.
Turkey. Asia
United States

$610, 470,000
1,473, 220,000
2,646. 560,000
3,848, 46J,000
980. Ofc'O,000
871, 080,000
999, 600,000
414, 120,000
119, 000,000
45, 220,000
21. 420,000
9, 044,000
190, 400,000
31, 510,000

2,75S, 431,571

I t shows that the United States reduced its indebtedness from

$2,776,000,000 in 1865 to $915,000,000 in 1890. The only other nations, however, in the entire list that made any reductions were
Great Britain, which made a small decrease, and Denmark.
Some of the enumerated powers more than doubled their indebtedness in the period named. In 1830 the total debt of the
United States was $38.33 per capita. The average for the foreign nations was $35.62, which was less than ours. In ten years
ours was cut down to $12.24 per capita, and that of the rest of
the wo Id now stands at $32.88 per capita.
For the decades ending with I860,1810, and 1880, the estimated
true value of ail property and the value of real estate and personal property as assessed, also the assessed valuation as returned in 1890 in the United States, were as follows:

Assessed val- Estimated true
$12,084,560, C05 $16,159,616,068
14,178. 986.732
16,90i, 993.543


From the summary it will be seen that the assessed value of
all property has increased from $17,13r),903,495 in 1880 to $25,473,173,418 in 1890, an increase during the decade of $8,333,2i>9,923, or 48.62 per cent. The true value of all property in the
United States, according to the Eleventh Census, is $65,037,091,197, or more than $J,000 (just $1,'039) per capita, as against
$514 per capita in 1860, $780 per capita in 1870. and $870 per capita in 1880.
Mulhall in his work, the Balance Sheet of the World, says:
It would be impossible to find in history a parallel to the progress of the
United States in the last ten years.. Every day that the sun rises upon the
American people it sees an addition of $2,500,000 to the accumulation of
wealth in the Republic, which is equal to one-third of the daily accumulation of all mankind outside of the United States.

An interesting article in the Review of Reviews gives a statement of the population and the expenditures of several of the
nations of the world, and the amount of revenue derived from
various sources. The United States annually collects $383,000,000; France collects $660,000,000; Germany collects $400,030,000;
little Italy, $380,000,000: Russia, $800,000,000: Great Britain.
$4^0,000,000. The United States has a population about equal
to that of Great Britain and France combined The United
States has at least 20,000,000 more people than Germany. In
comparison with the other great nations of the world, we have
the more resources in proportion to population, but taxation is
scarcely one-half in the United States per c:ipita as in the most
favored of other countries.
Mr. President, I have confidence in the country. Hard times
have come, but they will disappear and in great prosperity will
be forgotten. The United States has borrowed money when the
public interests have required it. The use of the national credit
is better than fiat money. So much for the credit of the nation.
There were purchased under the Sherman law in round numbers 168,000,000 fine ounces of silver, costing in the Treasury

$155,000,000. There have been coined about $36,000,000. There
is a balance on hand of 140,000,000 ounces of fine silver, which
cost $126,000,000, which has a coinage value of $181,914,961.
The difference between the cost of this bullion and the coinage value is $55,156,681. Though there is now out a greater
amount of Treasury notes given for this great stock of silver
than the bullion would bring in the markets of the world, it is
proposed to issue silver certificates in the first instance against
the $55,000,000, and then coin the $55,000,000 into silver dollars
for the redemption of the certificates. I think the milk in the
cocoanut is the fact that you c:in get $55,000,000 in the Treasury
without borrowing the money and without waiting to have it
collected under the revenue laws of the United States.
Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. What is the objection to that,
I should like to ask the Senator, if we can get $55,000,000 now
without issuing bonds and borrowing money and without waiting for collections? There is that much dead capital lying there
in silver bullion, and if we can get the $55,000,000 in coin, what
is the real objection to it?
Mr. CAREY. There is not $55,000,000 in the Treasury in
dead capital. Every ounce of silver bullion has Treasury notes
out against it.
Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. I think there is.
Mr. CAREY. If the silver were o fered to-day in the markets
of the world it would not probably bring as much by $25,000,000
as it cost the Government. Indeed, if the Government were to
attempt to unload its stock of silver upon the world it is doubtful whether the silver would bring 25 cents an ounce.
Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. May I ask the Senator from
from Wyoming a question?
Mr. CAREY. Certainly.
Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. Carrying out that idea, would
the Senator from Wyoming favor a bill changing the ratio, so
that the silver in the Treasury to-day for the redemption of outstanding Treasury notes should be coined into dollars under a
different ratio from that we now have?
Mr. C A R E 7 . No, sir; and I will come to that in a minute.
Mr President, there has bean coined since the passage of what
is known as the Bland act, in 1878, $119,322,550. If the provisions
of the bill are carried out, we will add to this in silver dollars
$181,914,931, making a grand total of $[521,237,511 of silver. Now,
if the construction is placed upon the proposed act which is contended for by the Senator from Iowa and other Senators, there
will be added to the silver money of this country $55,0C0,000 in
addition to the $621,000,000, making a grand total of nearly
$700,0 )0,000 of silver money.
m view ot the belief of the true bimetallists of this country
that the world will come to bimetallism. I ask what is the use
of coining any more silver? If the purpose was to coin only
$ >5,000,000 that would be another question. The total amount
of silver dollars that can be kept in circulation in the United
States does not appear to exceed $6 J,000,000. There has been
out once, I think, as much as $52,000,000 of silver. There is out
now about $56,000,000 of silver. Nobody will have silver dollars
who can avoid taking them, except in very small amounts. I
do not believe there is a Senator in this body who, if he should
go to his banking-house five different times and draw out in the

aggregate $1,000, and the bank each time should insist on his
taking 200 silver dollars, would not change his banker.
Mr. MITCHELL of Oregon. He would take the silver certificates, would he not? The Senator speaks of the limited number of silver dollars in circulation. Is it not a fact that there
are $336,000,000 of silver certificates in circulation now?
Mr. CAREY. I am going to come to that in a moment. I am
speaking of the coinage and circulation of silver dollars.
M r. MITCHELL of Oregon. There are $336,000,000 of silver
certificates in circulation, behind which there are now nearly
$363,000,000 of silver in the Treasury.
Mr. CAREY. That breaks in a little upon the line of my argument, but I will call the Senator's attention to the clause in
the report of the Secretary of the Treasury for 1893. The Senator [Mr. MITCHELL] will note that it is conceded that it is
difficult to keep the silver certificates out among the people.
The Secretary of the Treasury says:
One of the principal difficulties encountered by the Treasury Department
results from the indisposition of the public to retain standard silver dollars
and silver certificates in circulation. It requires constant effort upon the
part of the Treasury otlicials to prevent the certificates especially from accumulating in the subtreasuries to the exclusion of legal-tender currency. W hy
this should be the case is not easily understood, for although these certiticates are not legal tender in the payment of private debts, they are by the
acts of 1878 and 18SG made receivable for all public dues, and by the act of May
12, i§82, national banks are authorized to hold them as part of their lawful

The statement for February of receipts at New York shows
how readily silver certificates flow back to the Treasury. It will
be seen that more than half of the money received during the
month was in silver certificates:
The amount of custom duties received at New York during February was
87,424,084, of which 7.2 per cent was in gold coin, 0.1 in silver coin, 0.5 in gold
certificates, 56.2 in silver certificates, 20.5 in United States notes, and 15.5 in
Treasury notes. The amount received on the new issue of bonds to date is

There are one and two dollar bills in circulation to the total
amount of about $70,COO,000. If a law should be passed providing that no more one or t wo dollar bills should be issued, and
for the cancellation of the outstanding bills of these denominations, the total circulation of silver dollars might reach $130,000,000. So there is absolutely no necessity of coining any more
silver dollars at the present time. There are more in existence
than can possibly be used for all purposes, including those required to redeem Treasury notes and silver certificates under
existing laws.
It costs money to coin silver. I t costs from a cent and a half to
2 cents for each dollar that is made at the mints. There is a
loss by abrasion, and if there should happen to be an international"agreement the bullion would prpbablybe more convenient
for the Government than silver dollars coined therefrom, especially if any other ratio than 16 to 1 should be agreed upon. The
convenience of keeping the silver and gold in the shape of bullion was discussed by Mr. Fairchild, late Secretary of the Treasury. H e should be good authority, certainly, on the Democratic
side of the Chamber. I now read from his last annual report:
But whatever may be thought about the wisdom of the certificate system,
there can be no doubt that with It the further coinage of gold and silver, except subsidiary coin, is not necessary or wise. Far more gold and silver
c oins are now; in the possession of the Government than probably ever will
be needed for the redemption of certificates. Future accumulation of the

precious metals should be only in the form of bullion, -which can be kept
more safely and counted more easily than the cojn. If this suggestion was
adopted all but one of our mints might be closed, and large, useless expense
be saved annually.

In a previous report he goes into mis question much more
fully, but with the same conclusions. There is nothing to be
gained if the coinage of the silver is to remain in the Treasury
with the paper money out against it. There is another reason,
which I think is a very strong one why this bill should not become a law. I believe it will do great damn go to the cause of
silver. I believe in bimetallism, in the kind of bimetallism that
is advocated by a true friend of silver, Francis A. Walker,
whose writings are so much quoted on the side of silver. Only
a few days ago he delivered an address in which he took the
ground that bimetallism could be secured through an international conference. The world is certainly tending toward bimetallism. This country has an advantage now that it has not
had since 1873. I do not believe in throwing that advantage
We noticed a few days ago that in Boston, Mass., a large number of influential citizens of that State signed a circular or declaration bearing upon this subject for the purpose of promoting
international bimetallism. The London (England) Chamber of
Commerce passed a resolution in the city of London yesterday
asking that a monetary conference might be called, because of
the condition of things in India. I have a letter that ^received
recently from a very distinguished and influential American,
which is so much to the point that I shall trespass upon the
Senate by reading portions of it. It is from Hon. Charles Francis
Adams, of Massachusetts, a man who has large interests in the
West. He has done much for the development of the new
Western States. He has written much on the great public questions of the times. His letter is significant:

Boston, December 21, 1893.
MY DEAR JUDGE CAREY: I know well that expressions of respect never
come amiss to public men. even though, as in your case, they come from one
residing in what are supposed to be the capitalist and monometallist regions.
Nevertheless, the course you took in the silver discussion of last autumn so
impressed me by its manliness—it was so in contrast with what we are accustomed to in our public men—that, even at thialate day, I can not refrain from
writing to you abo.ut it. It is not often that public men have, in the face of
an opposing constituency, the courage of their convictions. When they do
show that courage it is a public duty in others to recognize the fact.
When this silver discussion began, nearly a year ago, I was a gold monometallist. It seemed to me the time had come when the world was drifting
from the bimetallic basis to the gold basis, and that no action of any single
government, or of all governments combined, could stand in the way of
what was in fact a movement dictated by the common business interests of
the civilized world. Moreover, the talk that there was not enough gold, so
to speak, to go around impressed me as pure nonsense. The movement towards a single gold basis, therefore, was not only a natural one, but seemed
to me wholly rational, and I failed to spmpathize with the futile resistance
the United States was making to it.
I have since seen occasion to revise this conclusion.
The financial troubles of last summer, due entirely to the withdrawal of
a small amount of gold from this country, has satisfied me that a gold
monometallic basis is altogether dangerous. It might do in quiet and
peaceable times; but let a great war break out, or a great financial disturbance arise. an:l the draining of gDld into the national receptacles, it
now seems to me, must inevitably lead to a recurrence of just such disturbances as we have gone through the last six months. For instance, no one

can doubt to-day that, if the United States, or Russia, or Germany, or
France, in view of any impending: international troubles, were to deem it
necessary to strengthen itself by drawing a hundred millions of gold into
its coffers, the entire exchanges of the whole world would be disturbed.
If this is so—and I do not see how it can be questioned—then it would
equally follow that a currency resting upon both gold and silver would be
far lessliable to this disturbance than one resting on gold alone.
It on*y then becomes a question how bimetallism, at a stable ratio. Is to be
As 1 see it, gold and silver, as precious metals, receive their value from
two sources: first, from their use as money; second, from their use as a commodity. The market value of the surplus of either gold or silver used as a
commodity depends, like the market value of any other commodity, upon
the amount of the metal which is in the market for commercial use, or use
in the arts and sciences. If there is an excess of it in the market at any
given time, the price falls. If there is a deficiency, it rises. If, therefore,
an international agreement could be effected for the free coinage of gold and
silver at a ratio, we will suppose, of even 16 to 1, the only result of a depreciation of either metal would be that, under what is known as Gresham's
law, that metal would drive the other metal out of its use as currency until
the market had an excess of the metal thus driven out, upon which the price
of that metal as a commodity must fall and the equilibrium be thus restored.
For example, let us suppose that, at a ratio of 16 to 1, silver would flow in
for coinage, and gold, under Gresham's law, would disappear. Immediately, as 1 see it, there would be a surplus of gold on the market as a commodity, more than the arts and sciences could use, upon which the price of
gold would fall; while on the other hand, silver flowing in for coinage, would
make a deficiency of that metal in the market as a commoditv, upon which
its price would rise until the two were equalized and rested at the ratio
The only way that this could possibly be brought about, of course, is by international agreement.. It is usually said that an international agreement
is impossible without the cooperation of Great Britain. This I believe to be
true. Meanwhile, on the otheL* hand, as I see it, the game is now absolutely
In the hands of the United States. We are masters of the situation.
If tlie United States to day were to see fit to strengthen its resources by
an issue of bonds and the purchase of a hundred millions of gold, in view of
what is going on in India, so doing would lead to severe financial complications abroad, and Illustrate exactly what I said in the beginning of this
letter, the danger of the world depending upon a single metal as a basis for
Its currency. The trouble is. of course, that the withdrawal of any considerable quantity of that metal not only produces the natural amount of
disturbance, but it produces probably twenty times that amount, owing to
the superstructure of credit which necessarily, in modern communities,
exists on a basis of precious metal. That is, the withdrawal of $1 in gold
influences $20 in credit.
If I am correct in this, the course you pursued In the late extra session is
the only course which a farsighted, statesmanlike public man could pursue under such circumstances; that is, hitherto the United States has been
doing its very best to secure the international demonetization of silver. We
have taken the load off the hands of Great Britain and prevented that country feeling the natural results of its own action. The moment we withdrew
from the market, ceasing to sustain silver, and by so doing made gold the
only basis of currency, the first step was taken toward compelling the ultimate remonetization of silver. This you materially contributed to. The
silver States owe you a debt of gratitude.
Western Representatives have, as I see it throughout this discussion, been
doing all they could to ruin the.r own constituencies. They have, so to
speak, been knawing away at their own noses with an Industry which would
excite admiration. But now that the field is clear, and we are on the monometallic basis for the time being, the next step is apparent. Placed as Great
Britain now is, with the Indian problem certainly Impending on her hands,
it does not seem to me possible, if the United States plays its cards well,
that England can escape being driven Into bimetallism within the next
three years. The rest of Europe is ready to enter into an international
agreemeut at any time. Great Britain alone stands out; but the United
States Is indebted to you for being in position to force the fighting to any extent it sees fit.
Such being the case, your course, you may rest assured, will Justify itself
in the eyes of your people at no remote period. The folly of the policy which
the United States has pursued « # • will be demonstrated. In other
words, the road to renewed prosperity in the silver States lies through the
course you have advocated. » * * The next step is obvious. It is to take

care of ourselves and strengthen our gold reserve. That being done, we
can afford to wait until Europe is ready for international bimetallism and
the rest.





I remain, eic.,





United States Senate, Washington, D. 0.

Thursday, March 15, 189J^.
Mr. CAREY. Mr. President, when the Senate went into executive session last evening-1 had just read a letter from Hon.
Charles Francis Adams on the subject of bimetallism in the
United States. I referred to a dispatch that was published yesterday in the Washington Post from London, which I could'not
at the time place my hand upon. I t is dated London, March 13,
and is as follows:
At the requests of the merchants and others in England having large
East India and China trade interests, the London Chamber of Commerce
has represented to the Government the urgency of the reassembling of the
international monetary conference with a view of finding some remedy for
the heavy fall and violent fluctuations in silver, which are represented as
causing grave injury to Eastern trade.

Germany's recent action has also been spoken of on the floor,
and I shall not take up time in referring further to this matter.
I t is evident that the German people are looking toward international bimetallism.
I have also in my hand a clipping from a paper printed in Colorado, the Colorado Miner, which,after discussing the injuries that
have befallen the country from the demonetization of silver, closes
by saying:
We feel that we have been wrongfully treated In the crushing of an Industry that is far-reaching and one which, as the financiers of England and Germany are fast becoming convinced, could have prevented the present panic
which has been so disastrous to the whole world by opening our mints to
the free coinage of silver as well as gold. And we further believe that the
time is not far distant wljen an international monetary conference will satisfactorily settle this great question for the benefit of all and prosperity again
be restored.

Mr. President, I, for one, believe that the repeal of the purchasing clause of the Sherman act and the closing of the mints
in India to the free coinage of silver will do more toward bimetallism in the world than all that has been accomplished during the last twenty years, or since silver was demonetized by the
chief nations of the world. We had better take this question as
it is. It does no good to talk of the manner in which silver was
demonetized, or why it was demonetized. We know that Germany acted in 1871 and 1873 and demonetized silver. Norway,
Sweden, and Denmark demonetized silver in 1873 and 1875.
These countries were followed by Holland. Russia fully demonetized silver in 1876. Austria-Hungary suspended the"coinage of silver in 1879. The United States suspended silver coinage in 1 S.-3. The Latin Union fully demonetized silver in 1878.
The legislative council of India closed the mints of that country in 1893.
The United States by the repeal of the purchasing clause of
the Sherman act has closed its mints to the coinage of silver, except the silver,on hand in the shape of silver bullion, and the
silver that may be required for subsidiary coinage.
The United States by the purchase of silver since 1878 had

tried to prevent the decline of silver. It had the assistance of
no other great commercial nation. Not a mint in all Europe has
been open to the free coinage of silver. The great nations discarded it, The great nations should freely rehabilitate it as a
money metal. *The United States can not do it alone. It would
please the great commercial nations of the world for the United
States to undertake it. The price of all our products would be
measured in gold as they are now, but our silver dollars would
be weighed and bring their bullion value only. The silver miner
would only be benefited for a day.
It is not possible for one country alone to give any commodity
so abundant or universal as gold or silver, without limit, a stamp
value very different from its commercial value. The gold in the
coins of the various nations has a fixed value. The stamp telling its value does not make it so. It has attained a universally
recognized value among the nations of the world. Melt the coin,
the metal is still worth its coin value. If silver could receive
the same recognition by the nations of the world there would be
no further controversy about the much discussed silver question. Until they do it it is to be hoped this nation will maintain its present position. I believe Great Britain, that has held
out against bimetallism, has to-day a greater interest in bimetallism than any other nation. By the recent legislation in t h e
United States the burden has been shifted from the United States
to the nations of Europe.
I a m one of those wno do not think that there are very many
persons in the United States who believe in gold monometallism,
or that there are many who believe in the issue of irredeemable
paper money. There are very few people in the United States
who want this country to go on an exclusively silver standard.
That the great'body of people are in favor of bimetallism there
can be no doubt, but they want bimetallism that is practicable;
they want both gold and silver coined on the same basis at the
mints and under the same circumstances, but they want it done
so that bimetallism may be maintained in the future, and so that
the United States will not pass immediately from the gold standard to the silver standard, and thereby destroy its credit.
The Bland law was a makeshift; the Sherman law was a mistake. I do not believe that makeshifts in financial matters are
good for the country. If the United States had not tried the experlmentsperhaps the great nations of the world would have gone
back to bimetallism before this. During the stress of civil war
Congress was compelled to do many things which could not
be justified in time of peace. There is but one course for a
nation like this to pursue, and that is the straight course, and
to deviate neither to the right nor to the left. The financial
legislation of this country during the last thirty years has maintained a high credit for the United States. No other nation
has accomplished so much.
We are proud of our country and proud of its credit. W h a t
has been the basis of its credit. That this country has not permitted its currency to depreciate, and that it has paid all its
obligations in the best kind of money. The policy has been to
keep each kind of a dollar in its debt-paying power equal to each
other kind.
The bill we propose to piss to-day, 1 think, is a bad stroke
against silver. W e not only propose to put in circulation $55,1189

000,000 more of silver money without helping the silver miner
one cent, but we propose to redeem the best paper money we
have in circulation, the Treasury notes, the only paper money
based on silver, which is legal tender for all purposes, and substitute what? Silver certificates which are not a legal tender
except in the payment of customs duties to the Government of
the United States; certificates which the Attorney-General has
recently declared are not money. Any creditor e scept the Government may refuse to receive them in the liquidation of debts.
I t is true that we can take this money to thesubtreasuriesand
to the Treasury Department at Washington and obtain silver
dollars for it, but silver money is a very inconvenient money today. We seem to have passed by the time when we want to use
in everyday circulation either gold or silver except in very
limited amounts.
Mr. STEWART. Will the Senator allow me to correct his
Mr. CAREY. Certainly.
, Mr. STEWART. The Treasury notes issued under the act of
1890 are not legal tender under all circumstances. They are not
legal tender when the contract otherwise provides.
Mr. CAREY. As I understand, we can make a contract for
payment in any kind of money; the .Supreme Court has decided
that, and that is true either of silver or of gold.
Why withdraw these legal-tender notes and substitute notes
which are not legal tender? I have heard no satisfactory explanation upon this floor, except that it removes a strain upon
our gold. At this point I differ from our silver friends. The
silver in circulation in this country should be just as good as
gold; it should hold such a position that it could be exchanged
into gold.
The Senator from Colorado [Mr. TELLER] said that the silver
dollar which had 45 cents of bullion in it was as good for ail
practical purposes as gold. I do not deny that, but it is not
the silver which is in the dollar that mates it good, it is the
confidence of the people that the Government will maintain the
declaration of its stamp and their confidence that the country
has the ability to so maintain it. Congress made the silver dollar good in the payment of debts. The United States has declared its intention to maintain the parity of the silver dollar
with that of gold. It can not be otherwise than good so long as
the Government has the ability to maintain its declaration.
Suppose we should go to a silver basis. Would the -15-cent dollar then have as great a purchasing power as the 45-cent dollar
which has the gold standard behind it? Clearly not.
I can not understand how it is that members of this body and
members of another body, which I am not permitted to speak
of, change their minds so quickly upon these subjects. There
were two national conventions which met in 18)2, one Republican and the other Democratic. One of these conventions must
have copied the spirit of the resolution of the other. The resemblance is great. Note the language of the resolution in the
Republican platform, adopted at Minneapolis in 1892:
The American people, from tradition and interest, favor bimetallism, and
the Republican party demands the use of both gold and silver as standard
money, with such restrictions and under such provisions to be determined
by legislation as will secure the maintenance of the values of the two metals,
so that the purchasing and debt-paying power of a dollar, whether of silver,

gold, or paper, shall be at all times equal. The Interests of the producers of
the country, Its farmers and workingmen, demand that every dollar, paper
or coin. Issued by this Gbvernment shall be as good as any other. We commend the wise and patriotic steps already taken by our Government to secure an international conference to adopt such measures as will iusure the
parity between gold and silver for use as money throughout the world.

I now call attention to the resolution in the Democratic platform adopted at Chicago in 1892.
We hold to the use of both gold and silver as the standard money of the
country, and to the coinage of both gold and silver without discriminating
against either metal or charge for mintage, but the dollar unit of coinage
of both metals must be of equal intrinsic and exchangeable value, or be
adjusted through international agreement, or by such safeguards of legislation as shall insure the maintenance of the parity of the metals and the
equal power of every dollar at all times in the markets and in the payment
of debts; and we demand that all paper currency shall be kept at par with
and redeemable in such coin. We insist upon this policy as gspeci-i lly necessary for the protection of the farmers and laboring classes, the first and
most defenseless victims of unstable money and a fluctuating currency.

In the law of 1890, known as the Sherman law, there is a provision more condemned than either of the resolutions referred
to, but meaning the same thing, as follows:
That upon demand of the holder of any of the Treasury notes herein provided for the Secretary of the Treasury shall, under such regulations as he
may prescribe, redeem such notes in gold or silver coin, at his discretion, it
being the established policy of the United States to maintain the two metals
on a parity with each other upon the present legal ratio, or such ratio as
may be provided by law.

The bill passed November 1, 1893, to repeal the purchase
clause of the Sherman act. contains the following pro vision—the
Democratic and Republican platforms abreviated:
And it is hereby declared to be tue poiicy of the United States to continue
the use of both gold and silver as standard money, and to coin both gold and
silver into money of equal intrinsic and exchangeable value, such equality
to be secured through international agreement, or by such safeguards of
legislation as will insure the maintenance of the parity in value of the coins
of the two metals, and the equal power of every dollar at all times in the
markets and in the payment of debts. And it is hereby further declared
that the efforts of the Government should be steadily directed to the establishment of such a safe system of bimetallism as will maintain at all times
the equal power of every dollar coined or issued by the United States, in the
markets and in the payment of debts.

The pending bill appears to me to be going in an opposite direction from what was declared by the two great conventions
and by the laws of 1890 and 1893.
As I said, the law of 1890, preceded by the law of 1878, known
as the Bland law, did not appear to do silver a particle of good.
The large purchases under these laws by the United States did
not stay the d iciine in the price of silver.
The statistics of the United S tites show a remarkable condition of things so far as the production of silver is concerned. In
1873, the year that silver was demonetized by the United States,
there was produced in the world 63,000,000 ounces of fine silver.
There was produced in 1892 151,000,000 ounces of fine silver.
Notwithstanding the nations of the world discarded silver, its
production was increased enormously. Two and a quarter times
as much silver was produced in 1892 as was produced in the year
silver was demonetized.
But it is said that silver has decreased in value. So it has, but
the aggregate commercial value of the world's production, increased from $82,000,000 in 1873 to $132,000,000 in 1890. Though
largely discarded as a money metal by most of the great commercial nations of the earth, the coining value of the silver produced increased from $81,000,000 in 1873 to $196,458,000 in 1892.

We have reached the condition to-day that all of the great
commercial nations have discarded silveu as a money metal.
The purpose of the bimetallists of this country should now be
to induce the great commercial nations of the world to go back
to bimetallism, or at least a sufficient number of them to go to
bimetallism to justify the United States in reopening its mints
to free coinage. All of our legislation should aim to accomplish
this purpose.
Congress was called together last August. An impressive
message was received from the President of the United States.
The reason given fo? the special session of Congress was to enable Congress to repeal the purchasing clause of the Sherman
act. The President of the United States contended that this
great issue of silver money was driving the gold out of the country that i t was decreasing the gold reserve, and that speedy
legislation was imperative. There are many who believe that
great benefit came out of the repeal of the purchase clause of
the Sherman act. Many more belie ve that if Congress had acted
promptly, all which was predicted by the President would have
taken place. Congress did not adjourn until early in November.
Mr. President, it is now propossd to add as much silver currency to the money of this country as would have been added
under the purchase clause of the Sherman law in about twenty-one
months. If you place the construction upon the proposed law
which is contended for by some, that th3 Secretary oi the Treasury will have the right to issue an additional #55,000,000 of silver
certificates, we shult put in circulation spaedily as much addition vl p.iper money as would have been circulated had we continued to purchase silver at present prices for neirly three and
a half years. Will it not have a bad effect on the cause of international bimetallism?
Every Sen itor who voted for the bill last November, especially
Senators on this side of the Chamber, will watch with much interest to see whether the President wiJl give his approval to the
measure which is now pending, and which will undoubtedly
pass the Semite within the next hour. It is a question of great
interest whether the President considers the causes which led
to the repeal of the purchase clause of the Sherman act have
already disappeared, or whether the necessity of putting $55,000,000 or $110,000,00 ), as the case may be, into the Treasury of
the United States at this time to meet the ordinary expenditures
of the Government, overrides such causes.