The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
SILTEE. SPEECH Off HON. LEWIS SPERRY, OF CONNECTICUT, IK 'I'M*1? HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, MONDAY, AUGUST 21,1893. WASHINGTON". 1893. Sllrer. S P E E C H OF H O N . L E W I S OF S P E 1 1 E Y , CONNECTICUT, IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Monday, August iUs 1893. The House having under consideration the bill (H. R. 1) to repeal a part of an act, approved July 14,1890, entitled "An act directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes' Mr. S P E R R Y said: Mr. SPEAKER: W e have been called here in extraordinary session for the purpose of repealing a law the provisions of which have brought the country to-day into a panio the like of which, we have not seen for twenty years. For one, and speaking for the constituency which I represent I am in favor of the unconditional repeal of the purchasing clause of that law; and in making this statement I will not qualify it by saying that I am a free-silver man or that I am a bimetallism Y e t I believe I could say I come nearer to being a bimetallist than that wing of the Democratic party who stand here proclaiming that they are bimetallists and demanding the free coinage of silver upon a ratio whioh will not permit anything but silver to circulate in this country. If we are to choose, Mr. Speaker, between the two standards, gold or silver (which seems to be really about the issue presented to-day), I announce that as between those two metals I am a gold man. I believe that this country can not undertake to carry a standard differing from that of the other great commercial countries of the world; that it can not undertake to maintain the free coinage of silver upon a ratio different from the commercial ratio in this country and in the markets of the world. 383 3 4 W e have heard much, Mr. Speaker, about the demonetization of silver, which it is said was brought about in 1873 by stealth. W e are told that members of both branches of Congress did not know what they were voting: for when they voted for that act. I have read the history of that legislation; and, in my judgment, Mr. Speaker, it was a premeditated act. The proposition had been brought before Congress by several Secretaries of the Treasury during several previous years, and had been considered by two or three or four different Congresses before the bill was finally passed. On this subject I desire to read briefly from the remarks of Hon. Mr. Kelley of Pennsylvania, then a member of this House, who stated the reasons why he favored a reminting law which should drop the silver dollar out of our coinage; and the reasons he then gave for that measure are precisely the reasons now urged by gentlemen here for restoring the silver dollar to wit, because existing conditions are supposed to operate favorably to Wall street, or the " money power." He urged as a rea- son for that legislation the fact that the bullion brokers of New York were making money out of the Government by the coinage of a silver dollar the intrinsic value of which was in excess of its coinage value. Mr. Kelley said: It is a bill prepared at the suggestion and under the supervision of the Treasury Department, and now comes to us revised with much care by the Committee on Coinage, "Weights, and Measures, exclusive of the chairman, his absence being accounted for by the reasons I have given. Let me, Mr. Speaker, hastily point out some of the interests that are on this floor seeking to protect themselves by preventing the passage of this bill. One silver bullion dealer of New York, during the last Congress, admitted to the gentleman who is now acting as chairman of the committee in charge of the bill that nnder one defect in existing laws he was making at the cost of the Government from seventy-five thousand to one hundred thousand dollars a year. * * * His profits—and he is but one of those who are growing fat and greedy upon the defects in our mint laws—arise in this way: Our country, like every other civilized Government, should procure its own metal out of which to make subsidiary coinage. Now, sir, every coin of ours that is not gold is subsidiary. Our silver dollar, half dollar, and every other coin that is not gold is subsidiary. As gentlemen seem to express surprise at this proposition I repeat that silver coin is subsidiary. The half dollar is not worth 50 cents, All other governments p^,y the expense of'minting by the difference between the intrinsic value of subsidiary coins and the value at which they circulate and at which the government redeemsthem. And such was the law of this country until, by a ruling of Mr. Guthrie, when he was Secretary of the Treasury, the Mint was ordered to receive silver from private individuals and coin it. Now, it so happens that a constit303 5 uent of the gentleman from New York has been taking advantage of that ruling and deposited silver to he made into half dollars and other silver coins; and for every $2 worth of silver deposited by him he gets four half dollars and one 10-cent piece, or the equivalent thereof. He has, as he stated to my colleague I Mr. Hooper of Massachusettsl and myself, been doing a business of from eighteen hundred thousand to two million dollars per annum, giving him as profit an annual income equal to the salary of the President for the Presidential term. * * * Again, sir. by a mistake in our law it has become impossible to retain an American silver dollar in this country except in collections of curiosities. They would, if coined in considerable numbers, be a source of enormous profit to the silver-bullion dealer of New York. Let me show you. The silver dollar required by our laws is worth 3} cents more than our gold dollar, and is worth 7 cents more than two half dollars. Now, sir, let us get back, as the gentleman desires, to specie payment before we legislate upon the mint laws, and you will have an interest of from one million to many mil-, lion dollars a year here, with its lobby in and around the House to prevent the Government from the possibility of losing a few dollars by substituting copper-nickel for copper and copper-bronze coinage. Every dollar we will then coin in silver will put from 3J to 7 cents in the pocket of the individual broker. Every half dollar for which he may deposit in silver and have it coined will yield him a profit of 2J cents. Now, sir, is the Government of the United States to be made the prey of the people of the world in order to give large profits to a few silver bullion brokers in New York? For there is the whole que stion.—Congressional Globe, secona session Forty-secona Congress, page 231i. Now, Mr. Speaker, that speech was made on this floor April 9,1872—a year before the bill demonetizing silver was passed. W e had no silver in circulation at that time because of the wellestablished law that unless the coinage ratio corresponds to the market ratio of the bullion, and with great nicety, it is impossible to circulate the two metals together. Without pursuing further the history of the act of 1873. which has been so much referred to by gentlemen in this debate as having been passed by stealth, I will, as my time is limited, attach to my remarks in the shape of an appendix a historical account of the demonetization of 1873, as placed before the House in a speech by Hon. Abram S. Hewitt, when that charge was first made. I borrow this appendix from the Hon. JOHN SHERMAN, as appears in a speech made by him in the United States Senate June 5,1890. Mr. PENCE. Mr.SPERRY. Mr. P E N C & W i l l the gentleman allow me a question? Yes, sir. As the gentleman says he intends to incorporate as an appendix to his speech something which he is not going to present before the House, I ask him whether Judge Kellay of Pennsylvania, after the demonetization of silver, did not say, 303 6 upon this floor, as reported in volume 7 of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, page 605, these words: In connection with the charge that I advocated the bill which demonetized the standard silver dollar, I say that, though chairman of the Committee on Coinage, I was as ignorant of the fact that it would demonetize the silver dollar, or of its dropping the silver dollar from our system of coins, as were those distinguished Senators, Messrs. Blaine and VOORHEES. I ao not think that there were threa members of this House that knew it. * * * The Committee on Coinage, who reported ,the original bill, were able and faithful and scanned its provisions closely. As their organ I reported it; it contained provision for both the standard gold and silver dollar, and the trade dollar.. Never haying heard till long after its enactment of the substitution in this Senate of the section which dropped the standard dollar, I profess to know nothing of its history: but I am prepared to say that in all the legislation of this country there is no mystery equal to the demonetization of the standard dollar of the United States. I have never found a man who could tell how it came about, or why. # * * I wish gentlemen to know what the bill was; it was a bill to reorganize the mints, and it waa passed without allusion in debate to the question of the retention or abandonment of the standard silver dollar. * # * I was the chairman of the committee that reported the original bill, and I aver upon my honor that X did not know that it proposed to drop the standard dollar, and I did not learn that it had done so for eighteen montha alter the passage of the substitute offered by Mr. Hooper. I simply ask the gentleman if Judge Kelley did not make that statement; and I ask him if it was not made just as I read it alter the demonetization act of 1873 was passed? Mr. S P E R R Y . Mr. Speaker, whether Judge Kelley made that statement or not, I am not advised. wards was a prosilver man, I understand that he after* I have read th*e words of Judge Kelley as they appear in the Congressional Globe. X hope the gentleman has read the words of Judge Kelley, to which he refers, correctly, if he has pretended to have read them at all. But his question reminds me of a remark of Thomas H, Benton, when there was a resolution presented whioh was undertaken to be injeotedinto one of the platforms about to be framed* It was refused in one shape and was afterwards sought to be put in in the shape of a resolution. Mr. Benton remarked that the resolution seemed to him to carry a stump speech in its belly. [Laughter.] It will, however, go into the RECOUP as a part of my remarks; and I do not think it will dp harm to the facts of the discussion, either as claimed by him or by me. But, Mr. Sceaker, however that may be, what I have quoted m 7 sthe language of Judge Kelley is unquestionably true, that the silver dollar was worth a premium, and because of that fact it was not circulating in this country, and because it would not circulate it was dropped out of our coinage for the reason that the Government was a loser on every dollar that it issued. Now, if it be true, as Judge Kelley said, that a single broker made seventy-five to one hundred thousand dollars a year under a freecoinage system which showed him a margin of profit of 5 cents on the dollar, will the gentleman tell me how much the bullion brokers of New York and the bullion producers of Colorado will make when they are allowed to bring their products to the mints in silver bullion and take out dollars, worth only 55 cents on the dollar, as bullion? [Applause.] But what I want to emphasize in that connection, and all I wish to emphasize, is this: That it is the history of every people and the history of all time that free coinage with unlimited tender must be accompanied in its ratio with an exact correspdndence in value to the commercial ratio of the metal out of which the coinage is made. And I refer gentlemen to the debates which took place in Congress in 1834, when we rearranged the ratio between gold and silver and raised it from 15 to 16. % I suggest to our free-coinage friends in that connection the fact, as related by Thomas H. Benton in his Thirty Years' View—and, Mr. Speaker, I wish to present to my free-coinage friends the fact as he presented it in his work—that they, the parties, were divided here before the House as to whether the ratio should be 15£ or 16. With so great an exactness must you bring your statutory ratio to the market value of the bullion that the two parties divided in 1834 as to whether that ratio should be 151 to 1 or 16 to 1. And yet gentlemen on this floor bring forward their propositions of free coinage on ratios running all the way from 16 to 1 up to 20 to 1, and everyone is invited to take his choice, as though it would not make the slightest difference what he chose, provided only he chose something that was agreeable to his district. [Laughter and applause.] It reminds me, sir, of the country schoolmarm—and I think she belonged to Missouri [laughter]—who presented herself for examination before a com303 8 mittee as a candidate to teach a school, and the committee asked her if the world was round or flat? Her reply was that upon so great a question aa that, of course, she should not be expected to have an opinion of her own. [Laughter.] She said, " I n dif- ferent districts in which I have taught I have found a great diversity of opinion among the people on that subject, and I have always made it my practice to teach it either way, just as the parents prefer." [Laughter and applause.] So, Mr. Speaker, with our friend from Missouri who leads the free-coinage debate in this House: He brings to this body an assortment ot ratios and he invites members on the floor to look over his assortment and pick out the one that in their judgment will be most acceptable in their district. But there is one wide difference to be made between the Missouri schoolmarm and the Missouri Congressman in that the schoolmarm was right half the time, and there is not a single one of these ratios brought forward by the Missouri Congressman that is right any time. Laughter and applause.] The highest ratio is 20 to 1, which makes the silver dollar worth about 80 cents. I have from the Director of the Mint a statement as to the amount of bullion bought by the Government under the two acts of 1878 and 1890, and it appears from that statement that the Government has already lost, or that there is a depreciation in value of the metal, and the people have lost, or somebody has lost, by this depreciation between the price at which the Government bought and its bullion price, which I think two or three days ago was 75 cents an ounce, the sum of $119,274,583. Is it any wonder, sir, that this great country running upon a financial system which shows such loss as that, with no gold reserve provided under either the statute of 1878 or 1890, compelled to go into the market and purchase silver, and powerless to stop the downward tendency of silver, is it any wonder that the country should be alarmed at the great exportation of gold going on since January 1, and begin to suspect not only their currency system, but even the solvency of the Government itself? Now, it has been suggested, and that is one of the great arguments that has been offered, sir, that we need more money. I will submit a statement prepared by the Secretary of the Treas303 9 ury, showing the amount of money in circulation from 1860 to 1892, inclusive: Statement showing the amounts of money in the United States, in the Treasury and in circulation, on the dates specified. Year. 1860. 1861, 1862, 1863. 1864. 1865. Amount of Amount in cir- Population. Money Circulamoney In tion per per culation. United States. capita. capita. $442,102,477 452,005,767 358,452,079 674.867.283 705,588,067 770,129,755 754,327,254 728,200,612 716,553,578 715,351.180 722,868,461 741,812,174 762,721,565 774,445,610 806.024,781 798,273,509 790.683.284 763,053,847 791,253,576 1,051,521,541 1.205.929.197 1,406,541,823 1,480,531,719 1,643,489,816 1,705,454,189 1,817,658,330 1,808,559,694 1,900,442,672 2,062,955,949 2,075,350,711 2,144,226,159 2,100,130,092 2.219.719.198 1866. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1870. 1871. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. 1877. 1878. 1879. 1880. 1881. 1882. 1883. 1884. 1885. 1886. 1887. 1888. 1889. 1890. 1891. 1892. $435,407,252 448,405,767 334,697,744 595,394,038 669,641,478 714,702,995 673,488,244 661,992,069 680,103,661 664,452,891 675,212,794 715,889,005 738,309,549 751,881,809 776,083,031 754,101,947 727,609,388 722,314,883 729,132,634 818,631,793 973,382,228 1,114,238,119 1,174,290,419 1,230.305,696 1,243,925,969 1,292,568,615 1,252,700,525 1,317,539,143 1,372,170,870 1,380,361,649 1,429,251,270 1,500,067,555 1,603,073,338 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 37,756,000 38,588,371 39,555,000 40,596,000 41,667,000 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 65,520,000 $14.06 14.09 10.96 20.23 20.72 22.16 21.27 20.11 19.38 18.95 18.73 18.75 18.79 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 32.83 33.88 $13.85 13.98 10.23 17.84 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 23.45 24.47 NOTE.—The difference between the amount of money in the country and the amount in circulation represents the money in the Treasury. As a matter of fact we never had so much money in circulation as we have now. In 1873 we had 8751.881,809. In 1892 we had $1,603,073,338, or, stated per capita, in 1873 we had $18.04 per capita and in 1892 we had over $24.47 per capita. Now, if it be true, as has been argued by different men upon this floor, that abundance of money makes high prices, I beg that some of these gentlemen who hold to that view will tell us, if abundant money makes high prices, why it is that prices have been continually falling, while our money, per capita and in total, has been constantly rising since 1873. As a matter of fact it is impossible to prove that because the gold dollar buys more of certain commodities to-day than it did 903 10 formerly, that therefore the gold dollar has appreciated. are other considerations to be taken into account. There There is tiie fact that prices have declined in silver-using countries and in gold-using countries alike. If the argument were true that sil1 ver would make good prices, then it ought to be true that in silver-using countries prices have not fallen. Upon the other hand, it is true that all over the world in the " last twenty years, and perhaps longer, most of the commodities which a parson needs have fallen. Wheat, cotton, and all the products of machinery, by reason of the improvements in machinery, by the reduction in the cost of transportation, by the reduction in interest charged, have fallen, not only in this country, but in every country. Prices have fallen in accordance with t.ic law of supply and demand, and not ^because, as gentlemen have suggested, that we have not sufficient money. Upon that point I will read briefly from the work of the Hon. David A.Wells upon Recent Economic Changes, page 115. Speaking of the fall of prices he says: A further fact of thehighesUmportance, and one that is not disputed, is that no peculiarity of currency, banking, or standard of value, or form of government, or incidence and degree ot taxation, or military system, or condition of land tenure, or legislation respecting trade, tariffs, and bounties, or differences in the relations between capital and labor in different countries, have been sufficient to guard and save any nation from the economic disturbances or trade depression which has been incident to such changes in prices. But, Mr. Speaker, there is one item in the account which has not fallen in the last twenty years, and that is the wage of the daily workman. I will submit as a part of my remarks the re- port from the Finance Committee of the Senate to the last Congress as to prices and wages, which are stated, not in dollars and cents, but in percentages. Relative wages and prices in gold in all occupations, iSiO^Ol. [Simple average of all the returns, taking the wages of 1860 as 100. Prom report qf Senate Committee on Finance on wholesale prices, wages, and transportation, Report 1394, part 1, Fifty-second Congress, second session, pages 9 and 14.] Year. 303 Wages. 116.8 115.8 107.8 101.5 101.9 1840 1841 1842 1843 1844 Prices. 87.7 88.0 87.1 86.6 86.5 Prices. Wages. Year. 1845 1846 1817 1848 i... 102.8 106.4 106.5 101.4 93.7 86.8 89.3 90.8 91.4 92.5 M Relative wages awi prices in golefin all occupations, ISfo-'w.—Oantlnufifl, Year. Prices. 102.3 ;05.9 103.7 109.1 112.9 113.1 113.2 112.5 101.8 100.2 100.0 100.6 114.9 102.4 122.5 '100.3 186.3 127.9 115.9 113.2 117.3 1850 1851 16E2 1853 1854 1855 1856 1857 1858 1859 1860 1861 1863 1S63 1864 1865 1866 1867 1868 1869 1870 93.7 90.4 90.8 91.8 95.8 98.0 99.2 99.9 98.5 99.1 100.0 100.8 100.4 76.2 80.8 66.2 108.8 117.1 114.9 119.5 133.7 Year. Wages. Prices. 1871 1872. 1873 1874 1875 1876 1877 1878 1879 1880.... 1881 1883 1884 1885 l. 1887.. 1889 1890.. 1891..- Wages. 122.9 127.2 122.0 119.4 113.0 101.8 104.4 99.9 96.6 106.9 105.7 108.5 106.0 99.4 93.0 91.9 92.6 94.2 94.2 92.3 92.2 147.8 152.2 148.3 145.0 140.8 135.2 136.4 140.5 139.9 141,5 146*6 149.3 152.7 152.7 150.7 150.9 153.7 155.4 156.7 158.9 160.7 From that report, made up with the greatest care, it appears that the daily wage of the laborer has increased since 1840, and the monetary system of the country has not, except temporarily and in a small way, affected the continual rise in daily wages. Now let me suggest to some of my friends on the other side of this question, if it be true that gold has appreciated in respect of certain commodities, it is also true that gold has depreciated in respect of the amount of labor which it will buy; because you can not to-day buy as much labor for a gold dollar as you could in 1873, when silver was demonetized. Therefore, I say that those who favor the gold standard can just as well and with as great propriety, or even greater, claim to this House and to the country that gold has depreciated, as that gold has appreciated. The change has been in favor of the man who labors. Mr. COX. W i l l the gentleman allow me to ask him a ques- tion? Mr. S P E R R Y . Mr. COX. W i t h the greatest of pleasure. You are speaking there of the average day laborer and his compensation for a day's work. Will you be kind enough to state to the House what is the average that you have there, for a laboring man, for a day's work. Mr. S P E R R Y . I have stated that the committee did not re- port it in dollars and cents. centage. 303 It is reported as a matter of per- 12 Mr. COX. Will you state to the House the average amount of compensation that the laborer gets in your State per day? Mr, SPERRY. I have not seen any authentic statement that I can now call to mind, and I would not undertake to state it precisely. Skilled labor, perhaps, $2.50 per day, and unskilled, perhaps, $1.25—sometimes as low as a dollar. Mr. COX. That is in your State? Mr. S P E R R Y / The labor in my State is almost exclusively white labor. Mr. COX. I do not suppose the gentleman would make a differance in labor on account of color. Mr. SPERRY. There might be a difference in the price. I have understood that in the South labor was very much cheaper than that; and it was testified before the Ways and Means Committee of the Fifty-first Congress that they could hire abundant labor in the South at 65 c&nts per day. My impression is you can not hire labor in my State at that price. Mr. BAILEY. Mr. COX. According to skill, and not color. Certainly, according to skill, and not color. Mr. SPERRY. In 1860, upon the percentage as presented in the report, labor stood at 100. In 1891, the wages stood at 160 and applying the line of reasoning which even my friend from Tennessee [Mr. Cox], will apply it to himself, it may be, upon that item at least, gold has depreciated since 1873; yes, even since 1860, because gold to-day will not buy as much labor at it did twenty years ago; it is better for the laboring man, and I will say hereafter, more emphatically than I do now, that the standard which the laboring man ought to have is the gold standard. Thomas H. Benton, in debate on this subject in 1834, speaking of gold, says that " h e fully concurred with the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. Calhoun] that gold, in the United States, ought to be the preferred metal; not that silver should be expelled, but both retained; the mistake, if any, to be in favor of gold instead of being against it." Mr. Benton's best efforts were directed to giving to American yeomanry the best dollar that could be made, and he recognized the fact that a false mint ratio undervaluing gold had driven it from the country. He counseled, therefore, that the friends of gold should set to " work at the right place to effect the recov303 13 ery of that precious metal which their fathers once possessed— which the subjects of European kings now possess—which the citizens of the young republics to the South all possess—which even the free negroes of San Domingo possess—but which the yeomanry of this America have been deprived of for more than twenty years, and will be deprived of forever, unless they discover the cause of the evil and apply the remedy to its root." Mr. SIMPSON. I understand the gentleman to say that re- turning to the gold standard will not decrease the wages of labor, because the laborer will be able to purchase more with that dollar, and therefore get more for his labor? Mr. SPERRY. Mr. SIMPSON. I did not say so, but I think that is the fact. Now, is it not a fact that a man who is en- gaged in farming is a laborer; and if it is a fact, and I think it has been clearly proven, that a decrease in the amount of the circulating medium decreases the value of the products of the farm, does it not decrease the wages the farmer receives for his labor? I would like the gentleman to explain that. Mr. SPERRY. I understand by laborer, not a man only who labors with his hands, for we all labor, even the gentleman from Kansas labors at times on the floor of this House, for I have seen him here when I thought he was laboring hard. [Laughter.] But the laborer under the common acceptation of that term is the man who sells his labor for hire as distinguished from the employer. The farmer is a man who is supposed to own his own farm and is the master of his own time. A laborer is not the master of his own time, and too often is not the master of his own wages. [Applause.] Mr. SIMPSON. I want to ask the gentleman to explain the farmer's interest as a laborer and not according to his capital. I want to ask you if it is not a fact that a farmer who labors on his farm does have his wages greatly reduced if the price of the products of his farm is reduced by a decrease in the circulating medium, and as the wages of his labor is decreased does not that affect his interest? Mr. SPERRY. If I understand the gentleman from Kansas correctly, it is this: He wants silver and cheap money in great abundance in order to benefit some particular class, to wit, the farming class. 303' u Now, if the gentleman wants me to assume what may be the effect of a certain statute passed under these circumstances I can not tell him; but I can tell him this: That if it be true that silver will make wheat higher, it is equally true that silver will make bread higher; and there are more bread eaters in this country than wheat-raisers. [Applause.] And I will answer the gentleman further in that connection, too. If the gentle- man expects that by cheap money and its great abundance he is to realize more for his wheat, I will say that not only every laborer who eats bread, many of Whom I am sorry to say hunger for bread at this time, will not be able to buy more of the bread he eats because unable to get more for his daily wages at which he is paid in silver. Mr. SIMPSON. [Applause.] Now, if the gentleman will allow md, I will say he entirely misconstrues my meaning* I do not want to es- tablish cheap money. , I want to keep the contract as it'is, and not take half of the money out of circulation. I want to have sufficient of it to see that the oontract is carried out as made, and that you shall not, by a return to the single gold standard, so decrease the currency and so decrease prices as to make farming more unprofitable, because the gentleman knows that profitable farming has already ceased. Mr. SPERRY. Let me suggest to the gentleman from Kansas that his conclusions might be correct* if lie only in his premise made a correct assumption. Let me tell the gentleman from Kansas that this is no single-standard affair and decrease of the currency; and let me tell the gentleman from Kansas that in 1873, when silver was demonetized, up to that time the entire silver coinage of the country was barely $8,000,000, and to-day, in round numbers, it is $500,000,000, worth 55 cents apiece* plause.] , [Ap- . The gentleman talks about discharging contracts in the way they were made. ment of gold. bonds. The contracts chiefly were made for the pay- That is absolutely tru0 of all the outstanding Now, when the gentleman comes here to say that the debtor class is to be benefited by enacting into law this cheapmoney craze which is now passing over the country, let me suggestto him that in trying to better the debtors he must, if his theory holds good, injure the creditors. 833 15 Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. SPEKRY. Just one thing more Just, just one thing more. If the gentleman will keep still I will give him something more. [Laughter.] The bonded railroad indebtedness of this country is over $5,000,000,000. in addition to which there is a current indebtedness and a floating indebtedness. The railroads, which the gentleman from Kansas and all of his kind so much hate, and against which they have so thoroughly legislated, as far as they could—it is for their benefit that the gentleman from Kansas stands upon thisfloorto tell the country that he desires to relieve the debtor class by issuing cheap money. He proposes to relieve the railroads of a large proportion of their live or ten billions of indebtedness, because they are the largest debtors, and it is hard for them to carry their burden. Who owns those bonds? They are owned by individuals who, if you consider the equity of the matter, can not as well afford to lose the money as the railroads can to pay it. In my own State we have on deposit in our savings banks $122,000,000. That is invested in part in railroad bonds and in other part in mortgages upon improved real estate paying rent throughout the State. Now, if I understand correctly the argument of the gentleman from Kansas it is, that the men who borrow money from the savings banks are the debtor class and ought to be relieved; those who owe the railroad bonds, the men who own the real estate and collect the rents, they are the debtor class, and ought to be relieved But who are you going to have contribute to this fund to relieve those debtors? I have stood at the counters of the savings banks in my State when the laboring man, his hand calloused inside with the tools of his trade, has come in to deposit a portion of his weekly stipend as a provision for " a rainy day," or to provide himself a home in the future. They are the creditor class whom you propose to have contribute to the relief of rail-, road corporations and men who own real estate. And let me here say that the average of the deposits in our savings banks is less than $400; there are more than 300,000 depositors, and now the gentleman from Kansas proposes to come in here with his cheap money and repudiate half the debts in 303 16 the country, to the end that the men who owe them, the men who own improved real estate and the railroads, who have issued bonds—to the end that they may be relieved; and he proposes to make the laboring men and women of Connecticut contribute $60,000,000 out; of their hard-earned savings for such relief! Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman wants to relieve the debtor class, and if the debtors want relief, let us pass a bankrupt law, and then we can get at the individual equities; but let us not pass a general repudiation law that does not take into account either the ability or the disposition of any man to pay his debts. Mr. SIMPSON. I understood the gentleman to say that the bonds were payable in gold. Mr. SPERRY,, What bonds does the gentleman refer to? Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. SPERRY. Mr. SIMPSON. The United States bonds. I did not say so. Neither the United States bonds nor the rail- road bonds are payable in gold. Mr. SPERRY. Neither? Mr. SIMPSON. There may be individual cases where rail- road bonds are payable in gold, but a large majority of them are not. As to the United States bonds, thev are payable in "coin," and if you take silver out of circulation you deprive the people of one-half of the resources which they now have to pay those bonds. Now, in regard to the savings banks which the gentleman speaks of, does he not know that the average deposit throughout the country is $93 per capita? And does he not know, further, that the laboring classes are more interested as investors in real estate, as owners of their homes, than they are in the $93 that they have in the savings banks? Mr. GEAR. I will say to the gentleman from Kansas that a large proportion of the railroad bonds—over 80 per cent, I think— are payable, principal and interest, in gold. Mr. SPERRY. When the effort was made on the part of the Government to refund its bonds the only standard coin in this country was gold. W e had no silver. perhaps some of it in Kansas. There was silver talk— [Laughter.] There was talk at that time on the part of gentlemen who wanted fiat money. I believe the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. SIMPSON], who has interrupted me so often, wants fiat money now. 303 17 Mr. SIMPSON. fiat money. The gentleman is entirely correct. I want I do not understand that there is any other kind of money than fiat money—money to which its value is given by the edict of the law. Mr. S P E R R Y . A gentleman from Kansas in the last Congress came before a committee of this House advocating paper money which should not be even a promise to pay, which should not even profess to be redeemable, which anybody could obtain who wanted it—money put out by the Government which should never bear more than 2 per cent interest, and anybody who tried to get more than 2 per cent was to be imprisoned. This money, instead of being a promise to pay, was to declare on its face "this is a dollar." Such money might be good money in Kansas; but outside of Kansas, I think not. It reminded me of the picture which a boy drew on his slate at school and then wrote under it, "this is a horse," because nobody would know it ' was a horse without this information. So no one could recog- nize the money which the gentleman from Kansas woulh have unless there were printed right on the face of it "this is a dollar." The gentleman has said that the bonds of the Government were not payable in gold. Technically they were not; equitably and in good conscience they were, because when the Government tried to place the bonds we had nothing but gold as a standard of money. But the talk of cheap money, which was even then rife in the atmosphere, had so scared the people, who were hesitating whether they should accept the bonds that Mr. French, of New York, who, I understand, was .one of a syndicate assisting the Government in refunding the bonds, wrote to the Secretary of the Treasury inquiring whether the bonds were payable in gold. I will read the letter of enquiry, and the Secretary's reply: N o . 94 BROADWAY, N E W Y O R K , June is, 1877. DEAR SIR: * * * If we are to have silver dollars with unlimited tender of freecoinage, then, it is said, assilver coinis receivable for duties, from necessity both interest and principal of the public debt must be paid in silver. Gold will disappear; the new market will advance the value of silver for a time to the disappointment of the advocates of depreciation, but when under the vast supplies of the world silver again declines, we perpetuate a depreciated and fluctuating currency with all attendant evils. And if, while restoring silver, we still pay gold on the bonded debt, the discrimination continues between bondholders and other creditors, odious and inviting constant assaults against a " favored class." There should be one and the same dollar for the bondholder, far„every 303 2 18 other creditor, public or private, and for every workingman—and that the dollar of uniform, stable value throughout the world, now of the greatest purchasing power—gold. And it is the people—the producing class, the workers—who havethe greatest interest in restoring the gold standard, and not bondholders nor mineowners; not merchants, bankers, and middlemen, for all these protect themselves, whatever comes. We seem to repeat the experience of ten years ago, when it was urged on technical grounds that 5-20s were payable in paper, whereby our credit was greatly impeded. It was not until May, 1859, after the passage of the credit act, that the great advance in United States bonds marked the sound policy " of that honest measure. So now, while your proposition limiting the issue will preservo the public faith, those who wish a depreciated dollar will be satisfied with nothing less. Therefore, while the public mind is yet unformed, we need an emphatic declaration which will crystallize honest and intelligent sentiment, that by noquibble will the Government undertake to repay in silver the sums it now seeks to borrow in gold. Then is the success of the 4 per cent loan assured, and with that resumption in 1879. With great respect, F. O. PKENCH. H o n . JOHN SHERMAN, Washington, J). C> To the above inquiry the Secretary of the Treasury made the following reply: TREASURY DEPARTMENT. Washington, D. <7., June 19,1877. SIB: Your letter of the 18th instant, in which you inquire whether the 4 per cent bonds now being sold by the Government are payable principal and interest in gold coin, is received. The subject, from its great importance, has demanded and received careful consideration. Under the laws now in force there is no coin issued or issuable in which the principal of the 4 per cent bonds is redeemable or the interest payable except the gold coins or the United States of the standard value fixed by laws in force on the 14th of July, 1870, when the bonds were authorized. The Government exacts in exchange for these bonds payment at their face in such gold coin, and it is not to be anticipated that any future legislation of Congress or any action of any department of the Government, would sanction or tolerate the redemption of the principal of these bonds or the payment of the interest thereon in coin of less value than the coin authorized by law at the time of the issue of the bonds, being the coin exacted by the Government in exchange for the same. The essential element of good faith in preserving the equality in value between the coinage in which the Government receives and that in which it pays these bonds will be sacredly observed by the Government and the people of the United States, whatever may be the system of coinage which the general policy of the nation may at any time adopt. This principle is impressed upon the text of the law of July 14,1870, under which the 4 per 9ent bonds are issued, and requires, in the opinion of the executive department of the government, the redemption of these bonds and the payment of their interest in coin of equal value with that which the Government receives from its issue. Very respectfully, JOHN SHEBMAN, Secretary. FRANCIS O. FRENCH, E s q . , 303 9* Broadway &ev> York, ' 19 Mr. BAILEY. I desire to say to the gentleman that the act to which he refers was passed in 1870, when silver was worth •more than gold, and when silver was as much the money of -the country as gold. Mr. SPERRY. The gentleman is quite right. But most of the bonds were put out before 1878, the demonetization act having already been passed; specie payments had not been resumed. Some were put out after that and taken by the pur- chasers upon the suggestion of the Secretary of the Treasury, as above stated, that they would be paid in gold. I will say further to the gentleman from Texas that in every case those bonds were paid for in gold—the Government received gold for them. W e were then trying to get onto a- specie-pay- ing basis, a gold basis. W e did get onto a gold basis and we ought to have stayed there. If the gentleman from Kansas or the gentleman from Texas wants bonds paid kind for kind, that will suit me to a letter. When gentlemen allow the Government or other institutions or corporations to pay kind for kind, they will pay in gold. . Mr. BAILEY. They ought to pay according to the contract. Mr. BOATNER. The gentleman from Connecticut should .understand that those who advocate free coinage do not advocate " cheap money; we advocate dollars of equal value. Now, does the gentleman advocate the passage of this bill on the ground that it will make better money than we now have? Mr. SPERRY. That is precisely the ground upon which I advocate the passage of this bill, and the stoppage of the accumulation of any more 55 cent dollars, unless you place behind those dollars the gold standard which is behind the paper dollar. In the absence of such a standard behind these two currencies, the silver dollar is worth intrinsically 50 cents, and the paper dollar is not worth anything; that is the difference. N (Here the hammer fell.] Mr. BAILEY. I ask unanimous consent that the time of the gentleman from Connecticut be extended so as to allow him to conclude his remarks. Mr. TRACEY. Of course I would be delighted to have the gentleman from Connecticut proceed-without limitation; but it 803 20 seems to me some restriction of time should be fixed, because there are gentlemen who desire to follow. Mr. BAILEY. I will withdraw my request if the gentleman from New York [Mr. TKACEY] objects. Mr. TKACEY. I simply suggest that the time be not exten- ded indefinitely, so as to interfere with the right of gentlemen who are to follow. A MEMBER. Say fifteen minutes. T h e S P E A K E R pro tempore (Mr. RICHARDSON). Unanimous consent is asked that the time of the gentleman from Connecticut be extended indefinitely. Mr. TRACEY. I object. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Objection is made. Mr. TRACEY. But I am perfectly willing The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman can not object conditionally. Mr. TRACEY. Mr. COX. Then I withdraw my objection. I would be perfectly willing to yield the gentle- man five minutes of my time. The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there further objection to extending the time of the gentleman from Connecticut indefinitely? The Chair hears none. Mr. SPERRY. Now, will the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. BOATNER] proceed with his question? Mr. BOATNER. I wish to know whether you desire that your constituents who have loaned their money to the constat* uents of the gentleman from Kansas shall be paid in a better money than they have loaned; and if so, how much better? Mr. SPERRY. Mr. BOATNER. Not at all. Then, if this money has bsen loaned upon a bimetallic basis, upon the issue of both gold and silver, on wliat ground of equity or justice does the gentleman ask that the lenders of that money shall be repaid in money based exclusively upon a gold standard? Mr. SPERRY. public credit. My first anxiety in this connection is the W e have been on an exclusively gold basis since 1834, as the gentleman well knows; and my heart's desire and prayer to God is that no free-coinage men, or not enough of them 303 21 at least, may rise up in this House to attack the public credit of the United States, whioh for the last twenty years has been equal to the credit of the strongest power in the world. And when the gentleman comes here to advocate a dollar worth intrinsically only 55 cents, which the Government can not under the injunction of the Sherman act maintain at a parity with gold m any such a quantity as is now being accumulated, I sayfirstof all let us be patriotic and maintain the public credit by stopping the further accumulation of dollars of that character. Mr. BOATN ER. [Applause.] W ill the gentleman yield for a further ques- tion? Mr. SPERRY. Wait a moment. other question yet. I have not answered your If the gentleman asks a question he must take the answer. My further suggestion is that the money that has been loaned in Connecticut has been loaned with the conviction and belief, as they had a right to believe, in the public credit. It was loaned either in gold or in money equal to gold in valuation, and now all we ask is that the legislation of this Congress shall be such that the two metals, so far as they have been accumulated in the Treasury of the United States, that the two dollars, the white and the yellow, shall continue each to the other to be of equal value. Mr. BOATNER. Can the gentleman point to an instance any- where in any part of the United States, and I might say anywhere in the commercial world as well, where the silver dollar did not, under the authority of the United States Government, stand equal with any other dollar; or h L he an instance where $S a silver dollar has been sold or offered for sale for less than its value as one—its par value? Mr. SPERRY. I concede to the gentleman from Louisiana that since the resumption act took effect in 1879, the credit and resources of this Government have been sufficient to keep its paper, and its accumulation of silver as well, at par. will continue so. I hope it I hope it will^be able to continue the same con- dition of affairs under all circumstances. But the fact is, that so low has the gold run in the Treasury by exports abroad, and so timid have our investors become in this country, and in other 303 22 countries as well, investors who would! be glad to come here with their money and got an investment if they had any assurance of stability in values—but so timid have they all become, that under the present Law the Government will not be able to maintain the parity farther. Therefore it is, that it is time, in the present emergency and in view of the depression which pre vails throughout the country, that Congress should stop talking,, and act in a manner to redeem the public credit. Mr. BOATNER. Wherein is the Government credit in de- fault? Has the gentleman any instance in mind? Does the gen- tleman suppose that the United States Government is not able to take care of the four and a half million or four million ounces per month on the basis of this issue of legal-tender paper? Wherein is the ground for this apprehension? Mr. SPERRY. Upon the ground that silver has been con- stantly accumulating; upon the ground that there is no, pro? vision in either the act of 1878 or 1890 to accumulate or acquire a sufficient quantity of gold reserve with which to maintain the parity of the two metals except through the sale of bonds; and gold-standard man as I am 1 venture to assert that it will be a very long day off before I will be willing to vote under the cir-: Gumstances that this Government shall sell bonds for gold and put the proceeds into the Treasury to buy silver, which would be tiie effect, I presume, of that policy. Thus far the country has maintained the parity, as I have asserted before; but the country fears, and every thoughtful man fears who gives consideration to the subject, and looks six months ahead, tha$ under the accumulation of silver going on so rapidly, in connection with the fact that all customs are being paid almost always in silver, that that condition of affairs can not be main* tained very much longer. And as the gold reserves of the Government, Mr. Speaker, have run down even below the one hundred million mark, I say it is time that we should put a stop to the further purchase of silver, as the French Govemmentdid fifteen years ago. It would be poor, statesmanship, I am sure, if we were to wait to make provision for the public credit until the public credit hadbsen lost. Now, I would suggest to the gentleman from Louisiana also S03 23 my belief that while the i^epeal of this act would be a great improvement, that it would x'estore credit, there is also supplemental legislation necessary to give sections of the South and West the relief they so much need, in my judgment. What troubles me is to know how in the world it is possible to continue pouring silver into the Treasury here and get any more money into the States of Louisiana and Kansas. You must give up something for it; you must give up cotton Mr. BOATNER. W e give up more than any other people for what we get. Mr. SPERRY (continuing). And the same course which the silver so far purchased has taken when it left the Treasury the silver that may be purchased hereafter will follow unless there shall be some change in the law which will divert it into another channel. Mr. BOATNER. I suggest to the gentleman that we never get anything in the South unless we pay a big price for it. Mr. SPERRY. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have asserted that the value of gold has not appreciated. say, also, that it has not depreciated, Upon the other side I may Both of these are of course assertions, but I claim that the weight of evidence is in favor of the statement that gold has not appreciated. In that connection I have suggested the fact that a man's wages are higher to-day in gold than they were in 1873; and that is the best standard, if you are going to legislate for the public weal, I do not say for the weal of the wheat-producer in Kansas, but for the public weal, and there is no part of the public that so much deserves and requires friendly legislation as that part of the public who labor by the day for their daily bread. And paid in that way, Mr. Speaker, and measured by that standard, it is the laborer who is benefited chiefly above all others under a gold standard, because his wages are appreciated and that which he can buy with a dollar of gold is more than he could buy with a dollar of silver, except, of course, as you keep the silver at a parity with the gold. Now, another suggestion right there. has appreciated? Can you say that gold Is there any way in which you can measure gold in terms of itself, so as to show whether or not it has appre303 24 ciated? It is an indisputable fact, which even the most radical silver men on thefloorof this House will admit, that the interest paid in gold, upon gold, has fallen constantly for the last twenty years. Now, if I own railroad stock which pays $6 a year on a hundred, it is the $6 a year earning capacity which measures the value of the stock. If next year that stock pays $7, its $7 of earn- ing capacity will fix the value of the stock. Now, let me suggest to the silver men on this floor that twenty years ago $100 in gold would bring you $6 of interest. To-day, if it is invested in a way so as not in any manner to bring the subject of credit into the problem, $100 in gold will not bring you $3 in interest. I do not speak of the present panic, but I speak of the working of the, money market in its normal condition. Taking the Government 4 per cent bonds for a series of years past, and estimating the premium upon which those bonds are sold, and it is an indisputable fact that those bonds, which everybody believes to be gold bonds, have paid in interest less than 3 per cent for something like ten years past. Now, I ask some of my silver friends on thefloorof this House, if gold has appreciated, and if the debt weighs heavily on the debtor, and if they want to pay it back in kind—I want to ask them how they account for the fall in the rate of interest, in view of the other claim they make that the value of gold has ri3en? It has not risen, and there is no line of argument you can invent that will indicate that it has. I make one other suggestion* and then I will give way to my friend from Tennessee [Mr. Cox], for I am afraid I am now consuming his time. That suggestion is this: Gentlemen have ap- peared here in behalf of free silver, to say that debts are so great that we ought to have relief in a cheaper money. Now, just' bear in mind in that connection that one man's debt is another man's asset. The five billions of debt in railroad bonds is five billions of assets in the hands of savings banks, life-insurance companies, other banks, trust companies, and individuals, whoever they may be, who happen to hold the bonds. It is exceedingly dangerous legislation, therefore, for anyone to undertake to come before a people like this, covering the territory that we do, and with the interests that we have, and pass 803 25 a general act of partial repudiation, upon the argument so often put forward in this House that in that way you will relieve the debtor. And right in that connection let me say also that gold is the lightest burden to anybody who has a debt to contract to-day, because the interest is least. Mr. Speaker, I have already consumed something more than the time that wa£ alloted to me, and thanking the House for its attention, I will take occasion possibly to extend my remarks in the RECORD, but further than that I am done. [Applause.] EXTENDED REMARKS. My purpose in extending these remarks in the RECORD is to present to the House some authorities which I had prepared to sustain the points which I made in oral argument, but which, by reason of the limited time allowed for discussion, I was unable to lay before the House. The question of coinage and currency is strictly a commercial question, and it ought to be so considered. The claim so often made that America can establish an American system of finance \shieh shall differ from the rest of the world is untenable and impossible of accomplishment even if it were desirable. It might as well be said that we can establish an American system of arithmetic which shall not accord with well-established arithmetical laws known to all the rest of the world. It is to be regretted, also, that pending the discussion of this bill so many gentlemen have attempted to raise an issue between the rich and poor. The claim so often made by free silver advo- cates that they represent the people as against the " money power" and the "shylocks of Wall street" and "Lombard street" has no foundation in fact, is out of place in a discussion of this kind, and its effect upon that part of the community who are in sympathy with the coinage views of those who make such4 assertions is vicious and every way deploi'able. The ratio of the mint should be the commercial ratio of the market. Our standard of value should be the standard of value recognized by other nations of the earth. Our people should have a stable currency which is equal to the best currency which any 803 26 nation possesses. Such, were the views held by statesmen of the past generation when this question came before Congress in an effort to change the ratio, which finally culminated in an act passed in 1834, The line of argument pursued at that time was clear, business-like, and convincing. The position taken by free-silver advocates at the present time upon all their main propositions is so utterly discordant and out of harmony with all previous history of the Democratic party, and advocates of sound money of all parties, that I feel justified in quoting at considerable length from that fearless defender of the people and advocate of sound money, Hon. Thomas H. Benton, of Missouri. The following is from his Thirty Years' View, volume 1, chapter 55: la the next place, Mr. B. believed that the quantity of specie derivable from foreign commerce, added to the quantity of gold derivable from our own mines, were fully sufficient, if not expelled from the country by unwise laws, to furnish the people with an abundant circulation of gold and silver coin for their common currency without having recourse to a circulation of small bank notes. The truth of these propositions Mr. B. held to be susceptible of complete and ready proof. He spoke first of the domestic supply of native gold, and said that no mines had ever developed more rapidly than these had done, or promised more abundantly than they now do. In the year 1834 they were a spot in the State of North Carolina; they are now a region spreading into six States. In the year 1824 the product was $5,000; in the last year the product, in coined gold, was 8808,000; in uncoined, as much more; and the product of the present year computed at two millions, with every prospect of continued and permanent increase. The probability was that these mines alone, in the lapse of a few years, would furnish an abundant supply of gold to establish a plentiful circulation of that metal, if not expelled from the country by unwise laws. But the great source of supply, both for gold and silver, Mr. B. said, was in our foreign commerce. It was this foreign commerce which filled the States with hard money immediately after the close of the Revolutionary war, when the domestic mines were unknown; and it is the same foreign commerce which, even now, when federal laws discourage the importation of foreign coins and compel their exportation, is bringing in an annual supply of seven or eight millions. With an amendment to the laws which now discourage the importation of foreign coins, and compel their exportation, there could be no delay in the rapid accumulation of a sufficient stock of the precious metals to supply the largest circulation which the common business of the country could require. In the third place, Mr. B. undertook to affirm, as a proposition free from dispute or contestation, that the value now set upon gold, by the laws of the United States, was unjust and erroneous; that these laws had expelled gold from circulation; and that it was the bound en duty of Congress to restore that coin to circulation by restoring it to its Just value. That gold was undervalued by the laws of the United States and expelled from circulation was a fact, Mr. B. said, which everybody knew; but there was something else which everybody did not know, which few, in reality, 803 27 had an opportunity of knowing, but which. was necessary to he known to enable the friends of gold to go to work at the right place to effect the recovery of that precious metal which their fathers once possessed—which the subjects of European kings now possess—w hich the citizens of the young republics to the south all possess— which even the free negroes of San Doiningo possess—but which the yeo manry of this Americaliavebeen deprived of for more than twenty years, and will be deprived of forever unless they discover the cause of the evil and apply the remedy to its root. It is to that p l a n Referring to the issue of paper money by the United States Bankthat we trace the origin of the erroneous valuation of gold, which has banished that metal from the country. Mr. Secretary Hamilton, in his proposition for the establishment of a mint, recommended that the relative value of gold to silver should be fixed at 15 for 1; and that recommendation became the law of the land and has remained so ever since. At the same time the relative value of these metals in Spain and Portugal and throughout their vast dominions in the New World, whence our principal supplies of gold were derived, was at the rate 16 for 1, thus making our standard 6 per cent below standard of the countries which chiefly pro duce gold. It was also below the English standard, and the French standard, and below the standard which prevailed in these States before the adoption of the Constitution, and which was actually prevailing in the States at the time that this new proportion of 15 to 1 was established. Mr. B. was ready to admit that there was so me nicety requisite in adjusting the relative value of two different kinds of money—gold and silver for example—so as to preserve an exact equipoise between them, and to prevent either from expelling the other. There was some nicety, but no insuperable or even extraordinary difficulty, in making the adjustment. The nicety of the question was aggravated in the year 1792 by the difficulty of obtaining exact knowledge of the relative value of these metals, at that time, in France and England* and Mr. Gallatin has since shown that the information which was then relied upon was clearly erroneous., The consequence of any mistake in fixing our standard was also well known in the year 1792. Mr. Secretary Hamilton, in his proposition for the establishment of a mint, expressly'declared that the consequence of a mistake in the relative value of the two metals would be the expulsion of the on© that was undervalued. Mr. Jefferson, then Secretary of State, in his cotemporaneous report upon foreign coins, declared the same thing. Mr, Robert Morris, financier to the Revolutionary Government, in his proposal to establish a mint, in 1783, was equally explicit to the same effect. The delicacy of the question and the consequence of a mistake were then fully understood forty years ago, when the relative value of gold and silver was fixed at 15 to l. But, at that time it unfortunately happened that the paper system,, then omnipotent in England, was making its transit to our America, and everything that would go to establish that system, everything that would go to sustain tho new-born Bank of the United States— that eldest daughter and apem gregis of the paper system in America—fell in with the prevailing current and became incorporated in the Federal legislation of the day. Gold, was well known, it was the antagonist of paper; from its intrinsic value, the natural predilection of all mankind for it, its small bulk, ind the facility of carrying it about, it would be preferred to paper, either for traveling or keeping in the house; and thus would limit and circumscribe the general circulation of bank note3, an£ prevent all plea of necessity for isS3 G 28 •ulng smaller notes. Silver, on the contrary, from its inconvenience of transportation, would favor the circulation of hank notes. Hence the birth of the doctrine, that If a mistake was to be committed it should be on the side of silver. Mr. Secretary Hamilton declares the existence of this feeling when, in his report upon the establishment of a mint, he says: "It is sometimes observed that silver ought to be encouraged rather than gold, as being more conducive to the extension of bank circulation from the greater difficulty and inconvenience which its greater bulk, compared with its value, occasions In the transportation of It." This passage in the Secretary's report proves the existence of the feeling in favor of silver against gold, and the cause of that feeling. Quotations might be made from the speeches of others to show that they acted upon that feeling; but it is due to Gen. Hamilton to say that he disclaimed such a motive for himself, and expressed a desire to retain both metals in circulation. and even to have a gold dollar. The proportion of 15 to 1 was established. The eleventh section of the act of April, 1702, enacted that every 15 pounds weight of pure silver should be equal in value, in all payments, with 1 pound of pure gold; and so In proportion for less quantities of the respective metals. This act was the death warrant to the gold currency. The diminished circulation of that coin soon began to be observable; but it was not immediately extinguished. Several circumstances delayed, but could not prevent, that catastrophe. 1. The Bank of the United States then issued no note of less denomination than $10, and but few of them. 2. There were but three other banks in the United States, and they issued but few small notes; so that a small note currency did not come directly into conflict with gold. 3. The trade to the lower Mississippi continued to bring up from Natchez and New Orleans for many years, a large supply of doubloons, and long supplied a gold currency to the new States In the West. Thus, the absence of a small note currency, and the constant arrivals of doubloons from the lower Mississippi, deferred the fate of the gold currency; and it was not until the lapse of near twenty years after the adoption of the erroneous standard of 1792 that the circulation of that metal, both foreign and domestic, became completely and totally extinguished in the United States. The extinction is now complete, and must remain so until the laws are altered. In making this annunciation, and In thus standing forward to expose the error and to demand the reform of the gold currency, he ^Mr. B.) was not setting up for the honors of a first discoverer or fi rst inventor. Far from it. He was treading in the steps of other and abler men who had gone before him. Four Secretaries of the Treasury—Gallatin, Dallas, Crawford, Ingham—had, each in their day, pointed out the error m the gold standard and recommended its correction. Repeated reports of committees in both Houses of Congress had done the same thing. Of these reports he would name those of the late Mr. Lowndes, of South Carolina; of Mr. Sanford, late a Senator from New York; of Mr. Campbell P. White, now a Representative from the city of New York. Mr. B. took pleasure in recalling and presenting to public notice the names of the eminent men who had gone before him in the exp loration of this path. It was due to them, now that the 'good cause seemed to be in the road to success, to yield to them all the honors of first explorers; it was due to the cause also, in this hour of final trial, to give it the high sanction of their names and labors. Mr. B. did not think it necessary to descant and expatiate upon the merits and advantages of a gold currency. These advantages had been too well 303 29 known, from the earliest ages of the world, to he a subject of .discussion in the nineteenth century: but as It was the policy of the paper system to disparage that metal, and as that system in its forty years* reign over the American people had nearly destroyed a knowledge of that currency, he would briefly enumerate its leading and prominent advantages: 1. It had an intrinsic value which gave it currency all over the world to the full amount of that value, without regard to law or circumstances. 2. It had a uniformity of value, which made it the safest standard of the value of property which the wisdom of man had ever yet discovered. 3. Its portability, which made it easy for the traveler to carry it about with him. 4. Its indestructibility, which made it the safest money that people could keep in their houses. 5. Its inherent purity, which made it the hardest money to be counterfeited and the easiest to be detected, and therefore the safest money for the people to handle. 6. Its superiority over all other money, which gave to its possessor the choice and command of all other money. 7. Its power over exchanges, gold being the currency which contributes most to the equalization of exchange and keeping down the rate of exchange to the lowest and most uniform point. 8. Its power over the paper money, gold being the natural enemy of that system and, with fair play, able to hold It in check. 9. It is a constitutional currency and the people have a right to demand it for their currency as long as the present Constitution is permitted to exist. Mr. B. said that the false valuation put upon gold had rendered the Mint of the United States, so far as the gold coinage is concerned, a most ridiculous and absurd institution. It has coined, and that at a large expense to the United States, 2,262,717 pieces of gold worth 811,852,890; and where are these pieces now? Not one of them to be seen. All isold and exported, and so regular is this operation that the Director of the Mint, in his latest report to Congress, says that the new-coined gold frequently remains in the Mint uncalled for, though ready for delivery, until the day arrives for a packet to sail to Europe. He calculates that two millions of native gold will be coined annually hereafter, the whole of which, without a reform of the gold standard, will be conducted like exiles from the national Mint to the seashore and transported to foreign regions, to be sold for the benefit of the Bank of the United States. Mr. B. said this was not the time to discuss the relative value of gold and silver,nor to urge the particular proportion which ought to be established between them- That would be the proper work of a committee. At present it might be sufficient, and not irrelevant, to say that this question was one of commerce—that it was purely and simply a mercantile problem—as much so as an acquisition of any ordinary merchandise from foreign countries could be. Gold goes where it finds its value, and that value is what the laws of great nations give i t In Mexico and South America— the countries which produce gold, and from which the United States must derive their chief supply—the value of gold ia 16 to 1 over silver; in the island of Cuba It is 17 to 1; in Spain and Portugal it is 16 to 1; in the West Indies, generally, It is the same. It is not to be supposed that gold will come from these countries to the United States if the importer is to lose one dollar in every sixteen that he brings, or that our own gold will remain with us when an exporter can gain a dollar upon every fifteen that he carries out. Such results would be contrary to the laws of trade, and therefore we must place the same value upon gold that other nations do if we wish to gain any part of theirs or to regain any part of our own. Mr. B. said that the case of England and France was 303 30 no exception to this rule. The y rated gold at something less than 16 to t and still retained gold in circulation, but it was retained by force of peculiar laws and advantages which do not prevail in the United States. In England the circulation of gold was aided and protected by four subsidiary laws, neither of which exist here; one which prevented silver from being a tender for more than 40 shillings; another which required the Bank of England to pay all its notes in gold; a third which suppressed «the small note circulation; a fourth which alloyed their silver 9 per cent below the relative value of gold. In France the relative proportion of the two metals was also below what it was in Spain, Portugal, Mexico, and South America, and still a plentiful supply of gold remained in circulation; but this result was aided by two peculiar causes: first, the total absence of a paper currency; secondly, the proximity of Spain and the inferiority of Spanish manufactures,which gave to France a ready and a near market for the sale of her fine fabrics, which were paid for in the gold of the New World. In the United States gold would have none of these subsidiary helps: on the contrary it would have to contend with a paper currency, and would have to be obtained, the product of our own mines excepted, from Mexico and South America, where it is rated as 16 to 1 for silver. All these circumstances, and many others, would have to be taken into consideration in fixing a standard for the United States. Mr. B. repeated that there was nicetv, but no difficulty, in adjusting the relative value of gold and silver so as to retain both in circulation. Several nations of antiquity have done It; some modern nations also. The English have both in circulation at this time. The French have both, and liave had for thirty years. The States of this Union also had both in the time of the confederation, and retained them until this Federal Government was established, and the paper system adopted. Congress should not admit that it cannot do for the citizens of the United States what so many monarchies have done for their subjects. Gentlemen, especially, who decry military chieftains, should not confess that they themselves can not do for America what a military chieftain did for France. Mr. B. made his acknowledgments to the great apostle of American liberty [Mr. Jefferson] for the wise, practical idea that the value of gold was a commercial question, to be settled by its value In other countries. He had seen that remark In the works of that great man, and treasured it up as teaching the plain and ready way to accomplish an apparently difficult object; and he fully concurred with the Senator from SouthCarolina [Mr. Calhoun] that gold, in the United States, ought to be the preferred metal; not that silver should be expelled, but both retained; the mistake, If any, to be in favor of .gold, instead of being against It. THE MARKET RATIO CONTROLS THE MINT RATIO. It will bo seen by the above position of Mr. Benton that lie maintained that the mint ratio should correspond with the commercial ratio; that in adjusting the ratio this country should be in accord with other great countries; he suggested the impossibility of fixing any mint ratio which would allow the two metals to circulate for any considerable length of the time under the provisions of free coinage, and in view of the mistake so liable to be made, and in order to be on the safe side, he maintained that as gold was the better currency the mistake, if any was to 303 31 be made, should be made in favor of gold, so that the American people might have gold money. An ounce of gold will buy in the market to-day nearly 28 ounces of silver. The coinage ratio is 1 to 1G. The free- silver advocate insists that it should be lawful for the silver bullion broker and the silver-bullion producer to bring his silver bullion to the Government Mint, where the Government should impress its stamp upon it, and deliver it back in a form—dollars—to carry a statutory and debt-paying value nearly double the intrinsic value of the bullion when brought to the Mint. The ultimate loss accruing from that palpable fraud must sooner or later fall upon the people among whom such a coin circulates, and yet the advocates of that theory claim to be the friends of the people! The mere statement of such a proposition would seem to be fatal to its advocacy by anybody. Upon the other hand, ho wever, very distinguished men claim, not only that such a policy enacted into law would be wise, but that the mere Government edict under which such coins circulate would enable both gold and silver to circulate freely and concurrently under the Mint stamp without regard to the intrinsic value of the bullion contained in the two different classes of coin. If the experience of men proves anything, and if any historical record can be relied upon, it is that free coinage of gold and silver with unlimited tender of each can not exist for any length of time unless the Mint ratio corresponds with the commercial ratio. In other words, the bullion value of the two coins must correspond exactly with the value set upon them by the Mint, The International Monetary Conference, Paris, 1878, Forty-fifth Congress, third session, Senate Executive Document No. 58, collated a long list of authorities upon that point and published the same in the appendix to their report, from which the following quotations are selected: The debate and legislation of 1717, and the advice of Newton, [Extract from reports made by Sir Isaac Newton, master of the mint, concerning the state of the gold and silver coins.] * * * * * * * Pages 318, 319: In Sweden gold is lowe st in proportion to silver, and this hath made that kingdom, which formerly was content with copper money, abound of late with silver, sent thither (I suspect) for naval stores. 503 32 In the end of King William's reign, and the first year of the late Queen, when foreign coins abounded in England, I caused a great many of them to be assayed in the mint and found by the assays that fine gold was to fine silver in Spain, Portugal, France, Holland, Italy, Germany, and the northern kingdoms, in the proportions above mentioned, errors of the mint excepted* In China and Japan 1 pound weight of fine gold is worth but 9 or 10 pounds weight of fine silver; and in East India it may be worth 12; and the low price of gold in proportion to silver carries away the silver from all Europe. So, then, by the course of trade and exchange between nation and nation in all Europe fine gold Is to fine silver as 14$ or 15 to 1, and a guinea, at the same rate, is worth between 20s. 5d, and 20s. except in extraordinary cases, as when a Plate fleet is just arrived in Spain, 'or ships are lading here for the East Indies, which cases I do not here consider. And it appears by experience, as well as by reason, that silver flows from those places where its value Is lowest in proportion to gold, as from Spain to all Europe, and from all Europe to the East Indies, China, and Japan, and that gold Is most plentiful in those places in which its value is highest in proportion to silver, as in Spain and England. It is the demand for exportation which hath raised the price of exportable silver about 2d, or 3d. in the ounce above that of silver in coin, and hath thereby created a temptation to export or melt down the silver coin rather than give 2d. or 3d. more for foreign silver; and the demand for exportation arises from the higher price of silver in other places than in England in proportion to gold; that is, from the higher price of gold in England than in the other places in proportion to silver, and, therefore, may be diminished by lowering the value of gold in proportion to silver. If gold in England or silver in East India could he brought down so low as to bear the same proportion to one another in both places, there would be here no greater demand for silver than for gold to be exported to India (see pages 266 and 778); and if gold were lowered only so as to have the same proportion to the silver money in England which it hath to silver In the rest of Europe there would be no temptation to export silver rather than gold to any other part of Europe* And to compass this last, there seems nothing more requisite than to take oft about lOd. or 12d. from the guinea, so that gold may bear the same proportion to the silver money in England, which it ought to do by the course of trade and exchange in Europe; but if only 6d. were taken oft at present, it would diminish the temptation to export or melt down the silver coin, and, by the effects, would show hereafter, better than can appear at present, what further reduction would be most convenient for the public. [Extract from the writings of Sir James Steuart, illustrating the monetary situation of England, 1759-1773.] An inquiry into the principles of political economy, by Sir James Steuart, of Coltness, Bart. (Volume 2, chapter 7, page 313.) Page 323: z * # 9 c c The defects in the British coin are these: First. The proportion between the gold and the silver In it is found to be as 1 to 15.2, whereas the market price (1759) may be supposed to be nearly as 1 to 14*. Secondly. Great part of the current money is worn and light. Thirdly. Prom the second defect nroceeds the third, to wit, that there are several currencies in circulation which pass for the same value without being of the same weight. 303 33 Fourthly. From all these defects re suits the last and greatest inconvenience, to wit, that some innovation must be made in order to set matters on a right footing. Trie aim of England's m oneiary legislation, 1773-1799. [Extract from a treatise of the coins of the realm, in a letter to the King. Oxford, 1805. By Charles, Earl oi Liverpool. 4to, 266 pages.] Page 341: A difficulty then existed, and Continues to exist, which must necessarily be removed before any plan can be adopted for the improvement of the silver coin. I have already observed that gold and silver, in reference to each other, are estimated at your Majesty's mint at a different value or price than these metals are generally sold for at the market. As long as this difference subsists both these metals will not be brought in a sufficient quantity to the mint to be coined; that metal only will be brought which is estimated at the lowest value with reference to the other; and coins of both metals can not be sent into circulation at the same time without exposing the public to a traffic of one sort of coin against the other, by which the traders in money would make a considerable profit, to the great detriment of your Majesty's subjects. And this mischievous practice, and the frauds committed in carrying it on, are the more to be apprehended in this country, where the mint is f r e e that is, where every one has a right to bring gold and silver to the mint to be converted into coin, not at the charge of the person who so brings it, but of the public—for since the 18th Charles II, chapter 3, the charge of coining gold and silver has been borne by the public, and, contrary to the practice of most other countries, no seigniorage has been taken. To prevent this evil it is necessary to determine whether tnere must not be a standard or superior coin, made ot one metal only; and whether the coins made of other metals must not be made and take their value with reference to this standard coin, and become subservient to it—and, in such case, of what metal this standard coin, to which the preeminence and preference are to be given, should be made. [Extract from Mr. Jefferson's notes on the establishment of a money unit, and of a coinage for the United States J * * * * * * * Page 441: The proportion between the values of gold and silver is a mercantile problem altogether. It would be inaccurate to fix it by the popular exchanges of a half Joe for $8, a Louis for 4 Frenchcrowns, or5 Louis for $23. The first of these would be to adopt the Spanish proportion between gold and silver; the second the French, the third a mere popular barter, wherein convenience is consulted more than accuracy. The legal proportion in Spain is i6 for 1, in England 15J for 1, in France (uncertain in the United States in the printed The Spaniards and English are found in experience to retain copy) 15 for an overproportion of gold coins and to lose their silver. The French have a greater proportion of silver. The difference at market has been on the decrease. The financier states it at present at 14} for 1. Just principles will lead us to disregard legal proportions altogether: to inquire into the market pri' e of gold in the several countries with which we shall principally be connected in commerce, and to take an average from them. Perhaps we might with safety lean to a proportion somewhat above par for gold, consider ing our neighborhood and commerce with the sources of the coins and the tendency which the high price of gold in Spain has to 303—3 34 draw thither all that of their mines, leaving silver principally for our and other markets. It is not impossible that 15 for 1 may be found an eligible proportion. I state it, however, as conjectural only. [Extract from report of Alexander Hamilton ontfce establishment of a mint.] Pages 458, 463, 464, 465: * * * - * # * • The difference established by custom in the United States between coined gold and coined silver has been stated upon another occasion to be nearly as 1 to 16.6. This, if truly the case, would imply that gold was extremely overvalued in the United States; for the highest actual proportion in any part of Europa very little, if at all, exceeds 1 to 15, and the average propor* tion throughout Europe is probably not more than about 1 to 14.8; but that statement has proceeded upon the idea of the ancient dollar. One pennyweight of gold of 23 carats fine, at 6a. and the old Seville piece of 386 grains and 15 mites of pure silver, at 7*. furnish the exact ratio of 1 to 15.6262. But this does not coincide with the real difference between the metals in our market, or, which is with us the same thing, in our currency. To dotermine this, the quantity of fine silver in the general mas3 of the dollars now in circulation must afford the rule. Taking the rate of the late dollar of 874 grains, the proportion would be as 1 to 15.11. Taking the rate of the newest dollar, the proportion would then be as 1 to 14.87. The mean of the two would give the proportion of 1 to 15, very nearly—less than the legal proportion in the coins of Great Britain, which is as 1 to 15.2, but tomewhat more than the actual or market proportion, which is not quite 1 80 15. • * * * * *. * One consequence of overvaluing either metal, in respect to.the other, is the banishment of that which is undervalued. If two countries are supposod, in one of which the proportion of gold to silver is as 1 to 16, in the other as 1 to 15, gold being worth more, silver less, in one than in the other, it is manifest that, In their reciprocal payments, each will select that species which it values least to pay to the otherwhere it is valued most. Besides this, the dealers in money will, from the same cause, often find a profitable traffic in an exchange of the metals between the two countries. And hence it would come to pass, if other things were equal, that the greatest part of the gold would be collected in one and the greatest part of silver in the other. The course of trade might in some degree counteract the tendency of the difference in the legal proportions by the market value: but this is so far and go often influenced by the legal rates that it does not prevent their producing the effect which is inferred. Facts, too, verify the inference. In Spain and England, where gold is rated higher than in other parts of Europe, there is a scarity of silver, while it is found to abound in France and Holland, whererit is rated higher in proportion to gold than in the neighboring nations. And it is continually flowing from Europe to China and the^Easfc Indies, owing to the comparative cheapness of it in the former and dearosas pf it in the latter. * * * * * * * But it is to be suspected that there is another consequence more serious than the one which has been mentioned. This is the diminution of the total quantity of specie which a country would naturally possess. It is evident that as often as a country which overrates either of the metals receives a payment in that metal it gets a less actual quantity than" it ought to do or than it would do if the rate were a iust one. * * 303 * * * * * 35 In establishing a proportion between the metals there seems to be ati option of oiife or two things— . To approach, as nearly as it can be ascertained, the mean 01* average proportion in What may be called the commercial world; or To retain that which now exists in the United States! As far as these happen to coincide they will render the course to be ptu> sued more plain and more certain. To ascertain the first, With precision* would require better materials than lire possessed, Or than could be obtained* without to incohvehicnt delay. Sir Isaab Nekton, in a representation to the treasury of Great Britain, in the year 1717, after stating the particular proportion^ in the different countries of Burble, Concludes thus: "By the ct>ui*se of trade and exchange between nation and nation, in ail Europe, fin& gold is to fine silver as 14|, or 15 to 1." There can hardly be a better rule in any country for the legal than the market proportion, if this can be supposed to have been produced by the free and steady course of commercial principles. The presumption in such a case is that each metal finds its true level, according to Its intrinsic utility in the general system of money operations. tExtract from report on CuiTency, made to th$ House of Representatives 6f the United States, February 24, 1820, by tVIliiam H. Crawford, Secretary bf the Treasury.] * * * * * • * Pages 518, 519: In an inquiry into the state of the currency, the Consideration of the coinage is necessarily involved^ The principles upon which the coinage of the United States has been established are substantially correct. The standard fineness of the gold coinage corresponds with the coinage of England and Portugal. The standard of the silver coinage differs but little from that of Spain. The American dollar is intrinsically worth about 1 per cent less than the Spanish milled dollar. This difference, if the Spanish dollar had not been made a legal tender, might have secured to the nation a more permanent usfc of its silver coinage. American dollars would not be exported as long as Spanish dollars could be obtained for that purpose at a reasonable premium. If this latter coin was not a legal tender, the banks might afford to Import It, and might sell, at a fair premium, the amount which might be required of them for the China and East India trade. *' * * * * e q It is believed that gold* When compared with silver, has beeil for many years appreciating in value, and now everywhere commands In the money markets a higher value than that which has been assigned to it in States where its relative value is greatest. If this be correct, no injustice will result from a change in the relative legal value of gold and silver, so as to make it correspond with their relative marketable value. If gold, in relation to silver, should be raised 5 per cent, 1 otrnce of it would be equal to 16.75 or 15| ounces of pure silver. This augmentation in its value would c&USd it to be imported in quantities sufidcient to perform all the functions of currency. [Extract from report of the Committee on the Currency on the expediency ' of increasing the relative value of the gold hereafter to be coined at the mint of the United States.] FEBRUARY 2,1821.—Read, and committed to a Committee of the "Whole House. 36 Page 556: In the United States, before the establishment of the present Government, it has heretofore been ascertained by a committee of Congress that, by custom, the value of gold has been considered as equivalent to about fifteen and six-tenths of its weight in silver. (See page 441.) This, without doubt, arose from finding this to be the average of the different values affixed to the gold in different foreign countries. Why it was thought proper, on establishing the mint of the United States, to reduce this value to 15 for 1 Is not now material to inquire. It is sufficient to know from unhappy experience that Its tendency Is to rid us of a gold currency and leave us n o t i n g but silver. The merchants, if they have occasion to import specie and can not obtain silver, are compelled to import gold at a loss of from 2 to 10 per cent. If they have a remittance to make they will, if possible, exchange silver for gold, as thereby they will gain from 2 to 10 per cent, according to the value of gold in the country to which the remittance is to be made. [Twenty-first Congress, first session, 135.] [Extract from report from the Secretary of the Treasury (in compliance with a resolution of the Senate of the 20th December, 1828) respecting the relative values of gold and silver, etc.] MAT 4,1830.—Read and ordered to be printed, and that 1,000 additional copies be sent to the Senate. * * * * * * * Pages 569, 570, 571, 575, 578, 580, 591: The history of coinage proves that little reliance can be placed 6n artificial regulations of relative values of the standard measure of property as a means of maintaining a regular currency of uniform value. Some remarkable instances, as noticed by Lord Liverpool, occurred in England in the reign of James I, and subsequently. Gold being estimated too low at the mint, compared with silver, was freely exported, which caused incessant complaints. To remedy this evil King James raised the value of gold in his coins by successive proclamations; but he at lastraised it too high; and during the remainder of his reign, and that of Charles I, the silver coins were exported until the complaints were as great for want of silver as they had been before for want of gold. About the middle o{ the seventeenth century, during a short period, according to the same author, the relative values at which the precious metals were estimated in the coins appear to have been in equilibrium with the market prices, * * * * * * * It seems very clear from these facts, to which many others of later datemight be added, that, however exactly the proper equilibrium of values of gold and silver may be adjusted at the mint, the balance is liable to be disturbed by causes which can neither be anticipated nor controlled by political power. If the regulation be founded on the most exact calculation of relative values for the time being, the vibrations of the values of gold and silver must alternately cause the expulsion of each; and where one metal is more essential to public convenience than the other, the adjustment which exposes that under any circumstances to general exportation or melting may become a greater evil than a regulation which constantly excludes from circulation the less desirable coin. These difficulties had long been a matter of great concern in England, although it was not well settled in public opinion which metal was the best suited for the currency of that country. * * 808 * * * * * 37 It remains to be considered whether gold or silver is the most convenient currency for the United States. It has already been observed that prior to the year 1831 gold and silver generally bore the same relation in the market of the United States which they did in the Mint regulation. Silver sometimes commanded a premium for the India trade. But, at no time since the general introduction of bank paper, has gold been found in general circulation. It may not be necessary here to Inquire minutely into the causes which prevented the ratio of gold and silver in Europe from affecting the price of gold in the United States prior to 1820. The fact that gold did not circulate in the United States at a time when it commanded no premium, is sufficient to prove that other causes than an erroneous mint regulation have excluded, and may still continue to exclude it from circulation. These are to be found partly in the operations of our banks, * » * * # * # The proposition that there can be but one standard in fact is self-evident. The option of governments charged with this duty is therefore between having property measured sometimes by gold and sometimes by silver, and selecting that metal which is best adapted to the purpose for the only standard. Why the latter course has not been universally adopted it is not easy to explain, unless it may be attributed to that prevalent delusion which seeks to secure the possession of gold and silver by restraining their exportation, and avoiding the payment of debts rather than improving the public economy by giving every facility to it. It would seem strange, however, that while every individual who had a deposit of money in bank, or in his chest (unless he is sufficiently deranged to think of hoarding it), would be wholly indifferent whether it were gold or silver. Governments should persevere in maintaining a different theory. But such has been the fact. The history of coinage abounds with mint regulations to keep gold and silver together, and statutes prohibiting, under severe penalties, the exportation of either; all of which have disappointed every expectation of their projectors. The adoption of one metal as a standard measure of property is recommended by its simplicity. No change in the mint regulations can ever be required, and it removes every pretext for dishonest or unwise governments to debase their coins. All other metals may be imported as freely as before, and, like other articles of merchandise, applied to the payment of debts. * * * * * * * In conclusion, should it be determined to maintain both gold and silver as standard measures of property, without changing the ratio, it will be advisable to discontinue the gold coinage whenever the premium for gold shall exceed 2 per cent. The mint may be employed in coining silver; and an assay of gold bullion will, at a small expense, answer every purpose now derived from coining it. But if it be deemed expedient to change the ratio, the extent of the alteration is a matter of considerable importance. * * * * * * * Although it can not be expected that an alteration in the erroneous relative legal value of the gold and silver coins of the United States will, whilst paper chiefly of a local circulation continues to be their general currency, be productive of any great advantage, still the change will do some good, and can be attended with no injury. The present rate was the result of information, clearly incorrect, respecting the then relative value of gold and silver In Europe, which was represented as being at the rate of less than 15 to 1, when It was in fact from 15.5 to 15.6 to 1. It would be better, at all events, to discontinue altogether the coinage of gold than to continue the present system. 303 38 [Extracts from the reports of Mr. C.P. White, from the Select Committee of the House on Coins, etc.] * [Extract from the report of June S , 1832, page 7.] O * * * * * * Page 6"4: The committee think that the desideratum in the monetary system Is thq standard of uniform value; they can not ascertain that both metals have ever circulated simultaneously, concurrently, and Indiscriminately, in any country where there are banks or money dealers; and they entertain the conviction that the nearest approach to an invariable standard is its establishment in one metal, which metal shall compose exclusively the currency for large payments. IS BIMETALLISM POSSIBLE? • W i t h such authorities before us it would sedm to be idle to talk about ratios in the present unsettled condition of the silver bullion market. In 1S34; when the ratio was fixed at 16 to 1, sil- ver was overvalued about 3 cents on the dollar, and the result was that silver disappeared from circulation, and from that date until 1878 the coinage of the United States was almost exclusively gold, excepting the fractional silver. A t the ratio of 16 to 1 a silver 4ollar is worth at this time about 55 cents, and at the ratio of 20 to 1, which is the highest ratio suggested under the pending resolution, a silver dollar at the present market price of bullion would be worth about 81 cents. Free coinage of silver, therefore, means silver monometallism. The advocates of the free coinage of silver may claim to be bimetallists; but they know? and everybody else knows, that bimetallism is absolutely impossible under any ratio at the present time. The $500,000,000 of gold now circulating in the country would disappear as in a night, with no hope of return, so long as such silver policy continued. Congress has already gone top far in the attempt to force a cheap silver dollar into circulation. It is the bullion in the coin which gives it value, not the mint Stainp. The United States recognizes this fact in respect of our gold coin; why should we not in respect of our silver coin also? It is provided by t&e United States Revised Statutes, edition of 1878, section 3505, that— Any gold coins pf the United States, if reduced in weight by natural abrasion not more than one-half of 1 per cent below the standard weight pye^crjbod by law, after a circulation of twenty years, as shown by the date of coinage, and at a ratable proportion for any period less than twenty years, shall be received at their nominal value by the United States Treasury and 303 39 Its offices, under such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe for the protection of the Government against fraudulent abrasion or other practices. That is to say, gold coin becomes demonetized, ceases to be legal tender, and passes at bullion value only if it shall become light weight to the extent of one-half of 1 per cent in twenty years'wear; and yet it is seriously contended here that we ought to pass a free-coinage silver statute under which every silver dollar would be 45 per cent light weight the moment it left the mint. The fact is, we can have but one standard. is impossible* possibility. A double standard International bimetallism is an international im- Bimetallism with free coinage and unlimited tender never yet existed for any considerable length of time in any country. silver. From 1792 to 1834 our metal currency was exclusively From 1834 to 1878 our metal currency was almost ex- clusively gold, and our experience is the experience of all other nations who have tried bimetallism with free coinage. It has been several times claimed on the floor of this House that France had succeeded from 1803 to 1873 in maintaining bimetallism, meaning by that the free and unlimited coinage Of - both metals with unlimited tender and the concurrent circulation of both metals among the people. Such assertions are easily made, but they have no foundation to rest upon. In referring to that statement so frequently repeated on the floor of the House, the New York Evening Post, under date of August 12,1893, said: We find it necessary, therefore, to reprint what Chevalier, the French economist, Says on this point in hl& celebrated treatise on money, Chevalier, it should be added, was the great champion of silver in his day. He says: "In the year XI (1803), when the law of seventh Germinal was enacted, which established for a temporary standard the ratio of 1 to 15J between the two metals, this ratio actually existed in the commercial world;, but little by little it changed, and soon gold came to be worth ordinarily a little more thanl5| times as much as silver—it has sometimes been worth a little aboye 16 times as much. This discrepancy, which has usually been about U per cent (that is, one-half of that which manifested Itself from lT28tol785), would have had no effect if the provision of Gaudin had been correct. On the contrary. it had a very considerable effect; it sufficed to retire gold from circulation. UA few years after th& passage of the law of the year XI gold became so Scarce that people had to buy it of the money-changers when they wanted to carry that kind of cash on their Journeys. In fact, the circulation of the two metals side by side, which Gaudihflatteredhimself that he should estab803 40 Etsh by means of the coinage ot pieces denominated S francs and 40 francs, O had ceased to exist shortly after the year XI, and twenty-five years after that date the circulation consisted of silver only." (La Monnaie, page 216.) Oceans of testimony in support of the foregoing statement of Chevalier can be obtained. Afterwards, on August 14,1893, the same paper, referring to the same subject, published the following editorial: THE EXPEDIENCE OF FRANCE. In his speech in the House on Friday Mr. BLAND quoted the British gold and silver commission of 1883 to prove that the bimetallic law of France at the ratio of 15J to 1 kept the market ratio steady at that ratio for the period of seventy years, from 1803 to 1873. This is one of the fictions of the silverites from which no amount of refutation will suffice to loosen them. But we will try to shake them once more. We might ask, as a preliminary question, why the spell was broken in 1873. The argument, based upon the supposed fact that silver and gold ratio was steady for the seventy years in question, is that there was a peculiar force in the French law causing that steadiness. Why did this magic cease to work in 1873? France did not close her mint to silver until after the market ratio had changed. It was nothing but the change of market ratio, which had begun to drain her of goldrthat drove France to stop the coinage of silver. The bimetallists themselves admit this when they throw upon Germany the blame of forcing the hand of France by selling silver in 1873 and later. So it appears, even according to their own showing, that the French bimetallic law of 1873 was good only for fair weather. When a strain came, like the selling of silver by a neighboring country, the bimetallic law gave way. So the real question at issue is, how much strain such a law could possibly endure. If we admit all that they claim for the experience of France, the sum total of their gain is that a bimetallic law has a tendency to hold the market ratio at a particular level, but that this tendency may be overcome by the conditions of supply and demand. Even this is more than we can concede. And first let us glance at the report of the British commission of 1888. This commission consisted of men of a high order of intelligence, but, as it happened, it did not embrace a single person who could be called an expert. Not one of the members had any special familiarity with the subject in hand, while all of them had general familiarity with it. Accordingly they were in the mood to accept as true any scrap of misinformation that had passed for a long time unchallenged. Such a scrap of error was the statement that France had had the two metals in concurrent circulation for seventy years, from 1803 to 1873, at the ratio of 15$ to 1. They took this for granted and proceeded to advance certain a priori arguments to account for the remarkable steadiness of the market ratio. Among other things they said: u The fact that the owner of the silver could in the last resort take it to those mints and have it converted into coin which would purchase commodities at the ratio of 15J of silver to l o f gold would, in our opinion, be likely to affect the price of silver in the market generally, whoever the purchaser and for whatever the country it was destined. It would enable the seller to stand out for a price approximating to the legal ratio and would tend to keep the market steady at about that point." When their final report was published Mr. Robert Giffen, the statistician of the British Board of Trade, who is a real expert in monetary science, took up this paragraph, so fraught with mischief, and showed that it was founded upon an entire misapprehension, for the reason that France did not have the two metals in concurrent circulation during the period under con803 41 sideration, but had had them alternately, first one and then the other. He produced and published the market reports of Paris for each month from 1820 to 1847, during all of which time there had beena premium on gold ranging from £ per cent to 2per cent. Nobody would pay a debt in gold when i per cent could be saved by paying it in silver. On every debt of 1,000 francs from 5 to 20 francs could be saved, according to the premium of the day, by paying in silver. The literature of the period is fuln proofs that gold was not in circulation at this time, although it was coined more or less at the French mint for money-changers and hoarders. After 1847 a change took place, due to the gold discoveries in California and Australia. Silver went to a premium in France, and was exported and meltedto such an extent that the country was left with an insufficient supply of small change, and was obliged to adopt a token coinage by debasing thefinenessof all coins smaller than 5 francs to .835 instead of .900. After 1867 there was another change. Gold went to a small but increasing premium, which became so excessive in 1873 that the coinage of franc pieces was limited by law, and stopped altogether in 1876, in order to prevent the exportation of gold. In short, the facts sh ow that France did not have the double standard in practice during the period in question anymore than we in America had it. Mr. Giffen showed conclusively, too, that the French law of 1803 had no tendency to hold the two metals together. It should be remarked that as no reason has been assigned by the bimetallists for the spell coming to an end in 1873, there is as little reason for putting its beginning in 1803. The ratio of 15£ to 1 was adopted by France in 1785, and was continuous from that time, and was merely reenacted in 18031 The work referred to in the above article is The Case Against Bimetallism, by Robert Giffen, 1892. In an appendix to that work the author gives a table showing the premium on gold in Paris each month from September, J820, to December, 1847, and the premium varied regularly, up or down, nearly every month. I add, one other authority: It comes out very clearly that one feature of the French system has been that, since 1803, France has sometimes had a currency approaching to monometallsm, if not actually monometallic; and it has happened that whenever the compensatory action of the law of thefixedratio has been called into play. Its result was to confine the currency almost entirely to that metal which was the cheapest for the time being. Thus, from 1816 to 1820 gold was practically the standard, and from 1821 to 1850, silver, and from 1820 to 1847 there ruled a premium on gold varying from a little below 1 to 2 per cent.—The Industrial Competition of Asia, by Clarmont J. Daniel, F. S. S., late of Her Majesty's Indian civil service, page 135. By reference to the table ot commercial ratios given in the appendix it will be seen that during the seventy years when it is claimed that France maintained bimetallism the commercial ratio varied but a trifle over a unit from maximum to minimum. The ratio was 15.41 in 1803 and 15.57 in 1870, and during that time the lowest was 15.01 in 1814 and the highest was 16.25 in 1813. The ratio has risen from 15.57 in 1870 to 23.72 in 1892, and to 28.52 for the first seven months in 1893. 303 42 It is quite a different matter, therefore, to undertake to maintain bimetallism for seventy years with a commercial ratio which does not vary a unit and a half in the extreme during all that time, and attempting bimetallism now when the commercial ratio varies more than two units a year. Even If the increased production is kept in view, it Is not easy to understand why* with the Increased purchasing toy the United States to the amount of six millions sterling per annum, and the simultaneous large increase of the Indian imports of silver, which averaged from August, 1890, when the Sherman act came into force, to March, 1893, upwards of 46,500,000 Otincesj the price should he Od. per ounce lower than it was in the beginning of 1890. It has, indeed, been argued that the recent fall in the price of silver was due to the blow which the passing of that act gave to the hopes of those who desired the free coinage of silver. But against thi3 it Is to be observed that the price of silver in Londonrose during the time that the Sherman act was passing through Congress, and continued to rise for some weeks after it became law. Whatever be the cause, the fact that, although the United States Government has under that act made purchases varying from 34 to 42 per cent of the estimated production of the world, and India has increased and not diminished her imports of the metal, the price of silver has fallen to Its present low level, is beyojid question and of grave moment. Supposing even that no change were made in the currency arrangements of the United States, the experience of the past would forbid the conclusion that thfc price of sliver Would be stationary at its present level. It would be imprudent to act on the assumption that no further fall is possible or even probable.—Report of the committee appointed to inquire into the Indian currency, Herschell Report, London, 1893, page 9. In 1837, when the new rupee was introduced into Bombay, Mr. Bruce, of the civil Service, and a member of the mint committee, thus wrote to that body: " I take the liberty of drawing your attention to the inconvenience which the public have for some years experienced from the disappearance of all gold from the circulation, and of submitting to your consideration the expediency of revising the principles by which the coinage of that metal is at present regulated; that is to say, of raising the existing mint proportion between its value and that of the silver coin, without which, as it appears to me, gold can never again be expected to form any part of the currency of this presidency. The present mint regulations must of necessity be tantamount to a perpetual banishment of gold from the currency. " Mr. Bruce then goes on to argue that the exchange rate for the gold and silver money of the East India Company's currency should be assimilated to the commercial rate, but he stops short of saying how this should be done."—The Industrial Competition of Asia, byClarmont J.Daniell,pages273, 274. Between 1769 and 1833 the currency of gold mohurs and rupees was remodeled four times. Almost as soon a legal rate was settled it was upset by the evolution of a different commercial rate. From 1793 to 1833 tho gold coin of India was undervalued in the silver coin, if judged by the contemporary European price of one metal in the other, which perhaps accounts for the almost complete disappearance of gold money from circulation. "At the beginning of this century, and previously, the East India Company used to export gold to England, while the undervaluation at the mint prevented the gold coinage from being replenished; at the same time tho im303 43 poj-tations of silver "went on increasing, and in 1835 the company, giving up the attempt to keep two kinds of full-value coin in circulation together at a fixed rate of exchange, abandoned gold and made silver, which had become the predominant currency, the standard of value and money of account for India." Note on page 302.—"Remarks on a Gold Currency for India," by Col. Ballard, R. E., mint master, Bombay, 1868.—The Industrial Competition of Asia, by Clarmont J. Daniell, page 302. "At the time when gold and silver money were both in use in the East India Company's territories, attempts were made from time to time, by recoining the gold and silver coins in conformity with what appeared to be their market value in one another, to make them exchange at a fix ed rate, but it was never successful for a long time together."—Ibid., page 299. Not only is bimetallism impossible, but experiments in bimetallism aro expensive. An estimate by tbe Director of the Mint shows that the United States have lost in depreciation of silver bullion nearly $8,000,000 a year since they inaugurated the bimetal policy in 1878; and the Secretary of the Treasury shows in a recent lettsr that it would cost $112,866,321 to rccoin our outstanding silver and bring it up to an approximate parity with gold. All highly civilized countries have abandoned the attempt to maintain a double standard. Not only is bimetallism a thing of the past, but the preference is universally for the gold standard, and this has been especially noticeable in the past twenty years. The coinage of full legal-tender silver was suspended in England in 1816*; in Portugal in 1854; in Germany in 1871 (proclaimed in 1873); in Belgium in 1873; in the Scandinavian Union—Norway, Sweden, and Denmark—in 1873; in the Netherlands in 1877; in Finland in 1877; in the states composing the Latin Union—Finance, Belgium, Switzerland, Italy, and Greece—in 1878; in Austria-Hungary in 18J92; and on private account in India in June, 1893. Not that the use of silver has ceased in these countries, nor is • The date usually given for the adoption of the gold standard by England is 1816. Dr. Soetbeer, however, in Geld und Munzwesen, as tending to Show an earlier date, quotes the Stat. 14, George III, c. 42 (1774), which provided: "That no legal tender in payment of money made in the silver coin of this realm, of any sum exceeding the sum of £35, at any time, shall bp reputed in law or allowed to be legal tender, within Great Britain and Ireland, for more than according to its value by weight, after the rate of 5*. 2d. for each ounce of silver." This act was redacted by act 38, George HI, c. 59 (1798). By act 56, George ITT, c . 68 (1810), legal tender in silver coin was limited to two pounds sterling, and the shilling was debased from 60 to 66 shillings to the pound troy. 303 44 it desirable that it should, but bimetallism has caased. In clos- ing these remarks under this heading I can not do better than borrow the language of a distinguished writar on finance, whose name is familiar to everyone conversant with the subject. Mr. Horace White, in an addro3s on " The Gold Standard," before the Congress of Bankers and Financiers, at Chicago, June 20,1893, sums up the whole bimetallic situation in his opening paragraph, a& follows: The most impressive fact in the world of finance is the dominance of the gold standard. A year or two ago Roumanla passed under its sway, to-day it is Austria, next year or soon it will be Russia, by and by it will be India, and meanwhile it has lost no ground that it has ever held. Three international conferences have been assembled to stay this conquering march, while none has been called to promote or assist it. Yet the movement has been as little impeded as that of an ocean steamer would be by the action of a debating society in its own cabin. Is all this due to human perversity, or has it a rational cause founded in the needs of mankind ? AS TO THE FALII OF PRICES AND RISE OF GOLD. Another claim that prices for commodities have declined, and that therefore gold has appreciated in recent years, and that the adoption of the gold standard would still further depress prices and still further appreciate gold and work to the detriment of debtors and the laboring classes and in favor of the rich is utterly unfounded in fact. To say that prices of certain commod- ities have declined in terms of gold does not prove by any manner of means that such decline is due to an appreciation in the value of gold, or that gold has, in fact, appreciated. There are a great many considerations to be taken into the question of declining prices. Price3 of commodities, agricul- tural products and manufactures alike, have declined in recent years, but they have declined in gold-using countries and in silver-using countries alike, and gold itself, measured in terms of its own interest or earning capacity, has suffered as heavy a decline as tha average decline in other commodities. Prof. Marshall repeats in various forms liis argument (Qustions 9755,9750, 9775) that the relative values of gold and silver do not lower the value of wheat relatively to other commodities. He contends that the importation of Indian wheat into England is due exclusively to the development of the railway system and the lowering of freights and to a series of very fa* vorable harvests; that if the cause of this exportation had been the rate of exchange we should have found Indian wheat coming a long time ago. In 1876 the price of silver was low, but India exported then only one million sterling in value of wheat as against eight millions now. " The difficulty," 303 45 to use Prof. Marshall's words, i.e., the competition of Indian with English wheat, "exists without any reference to silver, and would he the same if India had a gold currency." This way of putting the case of course neglects for the moment any consideration of the tendency which a gold currency if used in India might have, for more reasons than one, to raise the price of Indian productions. Using the argument merely to prove that it is not the metal out of which the coin of India is fabricated which bonuses her exports, it is unanswerable. Mr. W. Fowler, expresses a similar opinion (Questions 83S8,9077), that" price depends much more upon the supply and demand of the article than upon any condition of money," and tnat "prices, which are the governing factor in exports and imports, have much less to do with the question of the money than we suppose in our ordinary ideas about these things."—The Industrial Competition of Asia, by Clarmont J. Daniell, F. S. S., late of Her Majesty's Indian civil service, page 340. The question which next naturally suggests Itself is, "What have been the price movements of such commodities as have not in recent years experienced in any marked degree a change in their conditions of supply and demand? Do they exhibit any evidence of having been subjected to any influence attributable to the scarcity of gold? The answer is that not only can no results capable of any such generalization be affirmed, but no one commodity can even be named in respect to which there is conclusive evidence that its price has been affected in recent years by influences directly or mainly attributable to any scarcity of gold * for the purpose of effecting exchanges. in the first place all that large class of products or services which are exclusively or largely the result of handicrafts; which are not capable of rapid multiplication, or of increased economy in production, and which can not be made the subject of international competition—have exhibited no tendency to decline In price, but rather the reverse. A given amount of gold does not now buy more, but less, of domestic service and of manual and professional labor generally than formerl j.—Recent Economic Chcyiges, David A* Wells, pages 191,192. Note to the above: "There Is no feature in the situation which the commissioners have been called to examine, so satisfactory as the immense improvement which has taken place in the condition of the working classes during the last twenty years."—Report of the Royal {British) Commission on the Depression of Trade, 1888. Instead of an alleged lowering of^the price of labor, we have to report, taking a wide extent, rather a rise in wages.—Report of Factory Inspectors, Germany, 1886. Now, while such res ults [fall in prices] are not in accordance with what might have been anticipated from and can not be satisfactorily explained by any theory of the predominating and depressing influence of a scarcity of gold on prices, they are exactly the results which might have been expected from and can be satisfactorily explained by the conditions of supply and demand—conditions so varying with time, place, and circumstance as to require in the case of every commodity a special examination to determine its price experience, and which experience, once recognized, will rarely or never be found to exactly correspond with the experience of any other commodity; the leading factor occasioning the recent decline in the prices of sugars having been an extraordinary artificial stimulus; in quinine the changes in the sources of supply from natural to artificially cultivated trees; in wheat, the accessibility of new and fertile territory, and a reduction of freights; in freights, on land, the reduction in the cost of iron and steel, and on the ocean new methods of propulsion, economy In fuel and undu% multiplication of vessels; in iron and steel, new processes and new furnaces, at303 4 G fording a larger and better product with ioss labor in A given time; in c6tt^in varieties of wool, changes in fashion, and in others an increase of production in a greater ratio than population and their consuming capacity; in ores and coal, the introduction of the steam drill and more powerful explosive agents; in cheese, a disproportionate market price for butter; in cotton cloth, because the spindles Which revolved 4,000 times in a minute in 1874 made 10,000 revolutions in the same time in 1885; ill "gum arable" and "senna," a War in the Soudan; in Wines, a destruction of the Vines by disease; in American hog products, a plentiful supply ttf hogs, consequentupon an abundant corn (maize) crop, etc. And yet all these B diverse factors of influence evolve and harmonize O under, and at the same time demonstrate, the existence of a law more immutable than any other in economic science, namely, that When production lb creases in excess of current market demand, even to the extent of an inconsiderable fraction, or is cheapened through any agency, prices wiil decline; and that when, on the other hand, production is checked or arrested by natural events—storms, pestilence, extremes of temperature; or by artificial interference, as war, excessive taxation, or political misrule or disturbances—prices will advance; and between these extremes of influence prices will fluctuate in accordance with the progressive changes in circum_ stances and the hopes and fears of producers, exchangers, and consumers.— JSecent Economic Changes, David A. Weil3, paged 202,203. The monetary experience of the United States since 1879 has been so especially remarkable, and has sUch bearing on the economic problem of the rem-, tion of money supply to prices, as to entitle it to c&teiided notice. The following table shows the changes in the circulating inedia of the United s t a t e s bullion, coin, and paper—since January 1,1879 (when the country resumed specie payments), and January 1,1889— a period of ten years: Circulation. Jan. 1, 1879. Jan. 1, 1889. Gold coin and bullion Silver dollars Silver bullion Fractional silver National-bank notes Legal-tender notes Total currency issues 1278,310,126 22,495,550 9,121,417 71,021,162 323,791,674 346,631,016 1,051,420,945 $704,608,1G9 315,186,190 10,865,237 76,889,983 233,600,027 316,681,016 1,6S7,890,622 - •Increase. 1 Total. •$426,298,043 •292,690,640 •1,743,820 . •5,863,821 t90,131,647 -^Decrease. Of this large increase of $636,469,677, $578,637,368, in coin and paper, were in the hands of the people; and $57,832,309, in bullion, coin, and paper, in the National Treasury. It thus appears that, While there has been an increase in ;the population of the United States during the period of ten years under consideration of about 30 per cent, the increase in the precious metals and paper available for circulation during the same time was 60.05 per cent; while of coin and paper in active use among the people and banks the increase was 69.9 per cent, or much more than double the rate of increase in population. Now, as during this same period there was a great and universal decline In the prices of commodities in the United States (as elsewhere), the interesting question arises, How do these experiences harmonize with the theory that the voluine of circulating medium controls prices, and that, the movement of the precious metals puts down prices in the event of a reduction of the supply and puts them up in the event of an increase of supply? Notft, further, that the increase of gold and silver coin and bullion in the United States during the ten years from 1879 to 1889 Was $720,000,000, while 803 47 the paper circulation diminished. Nor can it he maintained that the fall in the value of silver bullion has affected this circulation since, for aU purposes of internal circulation, silver and its paper representatives have had the same efficiency and exchangeable value as existed before the depreciation of silver bullion. The availability of silver coin for tho settlement on .the part of the United States of international balances has been alone affected; and this, so long as there has been an adequate supply of gold, Is an immaterial factor. It would, therefore, seem that the above exhibit fur* nishes the most complete refutation of the theory that changes in the supr pliesof the precious metals account for the fall in the prices of commodities.—Recent Economic Changes, David A. Wells, pages 231,232,223. THE GOLD STJPPIIT. Another claim often made in debate upon this floor in the past week is that there is not sufficient gold in the world to supply the money needed to effect the exchanges if all nations should adopt the gold standard. The first weakness of that ar- gument is, so far as the United States is concerned, that whatever supplies of gold other nations have, we are certainly in condition to supply ourselves with all that we need. First, our immense and varied natural resources; the great variety and extent of our home manufactures; our cotton and food supplies, so much needed abroad, put us in position to demand from other nations in trade balances whatever gold we may need in the future. And another point not to be lost sight of, and perhaps the strongest in our favor, is that of the one hundred and thirty millions of gold output jannually in. the world the United States produces upwards of one-quarter, and has produced it in those proportions for many years past. All we need is such laws as will permit gold to circulate among us. then supply us. The Jaws of trade will If anyone has any fear that the adoption of a gold standard by this country, and the few remaining countries which have not as yet adopted it, would result in a contraction of currency because of a scarcity of gold, an examination of the authorities, historical and statistical, can not but convince any investigator that such a fear is unwarranted. The recent closing of the Indian mint to the further coinage of silver seems to have emphasized this fear among those who look upon India as a great silver-using country, embracing 255,000,000 of people, and the idea of their being supplied with a gold currency in the present "scramble for g o l d " among Eu803 48 ropean nations seems to be one which is peculiarly exciting to the free-silver advocate. But there is authority for saying that India has already sufficient gold for her own monetary purposes if the gold standard should be finally adopted, as it undoubtedly will be. India was on a gold basis up to 1835, when gold was demonetized in British India by the East India Company (by act of Parliament, September 6,1873), but from that time forward India has lost none of her gold. It is still in existence as bullion or ornament or plate, not to mention a very considerable amount of gold coin still passing current in different provinces. Upon that point I quote from the following authorities: Jfet imports of gold and silver into India from 1859 to 1893, as furnished by the Director of the Mint. Pounds sterling. Gold Silver Total, thirty-three years kmm. Dollars. 125,900,000 230,418,000 612,721,549 1,121,329,197 356,324,000 1,734,050,746 It has been objected1 that the natives of India are accustomed to silver; that the transactions are small in amount, so that silver is better suited to their use than gold, and that they will not willingly give up the rupee. The answer to this is, that it is not proposed to substitute the gold sovereign for the rupee as currency in ordinary use, and that the case would in this respect resemble that of many of the countries above referred to, where the standard is gold, but the ordinary currency is silver or paper. Moreover, gold has never been entirely out of use in India. It is true that in India silver has for the last thirty or forty years been more exclusively used than in many of the countries referred to. But, though gold coins have not been in use as legal tender, and no fixed ratio has been established between gold and silver coins, there is no part of India in which gold coins are not well known and procurable, and recognized as a form of money, the value of the chief gold coins being regularly entered in the " Prices current." Until 1835 or thereabouts gold coins constituted a recognized part of the Indian currency, and they were received by the government in payment of its demands till December, 1852; and as late as 1854-'55 gold coin to the value of £412,000, was sent by the government from India to London. The value of the gold imported into India in the eight years from 1862-'63 to 1869-70, was no less than £50,000,000. Sir Charles Trevelyan, writing in 1864 in support of a proposal to make sovereigns legal tender in India, referred to the large importation of gold since 1860 as indicating "the determination of the people to have gold," and added that it "shows that the Government would be cordially seconded by them in any attempt to introduce a gold currency on a sound footing." The Secretary of State, Sir Charles Wood, when replying in the same year, wrote: 4 4 It is obvious, from the information collected by Sir Charles Trevelyan, .that there is a very general desire for the introduction of gold coins in 303 49 India," and " that the people, even in the upper and remote parts of India, are well acquainted with the sovereign." There is little question but that these observations areas applicable at the present time as when originally made. It may be added that the value of the net imports of gold into India since 1880 has amounted to more thanRx. 44,000,000 ($308,428,000coinage value), and it might be expected that much of the uncoined gold now in India, which must be very considerable, would be brought to the mints if a gold coinage were introduced on a proper basis.—Report of the committee appointed to inquire into the Indian currency. The flerschol Report, London, 1893, page 28. Dual currencies of gold and silver, exchanging with one another at their market valuation, have be3n commonly In use in India for many centuries, and are so to this day. It is only in British territory, and since the year 1835, that gold has been demonetized.—The Industrial Competition of Asia, by Clar* mont I. Daniell, page 295. That this gold treasure, of the value of £270,000,000, Is much more than the country will require for its gold currency need scarcely be stated. In former years the gold currency of India was not less than one-seventeenth part of the value of the whole circulation, and that the proportion was larger there can be little doubt. During the first thirty-two years of this century the East India Company coined gold and silver money in about the proportion of 1 to 17, but there was at the same time in the company's territories a large circulation of gold coins provided by the mints of native powers—so large that up to that time about half the revenue used to be taken in gold. The currency of India at this day Is estimated to amount to two thousand eight hundred and eighty-nine millions of rupees, and if one-tenth of this value is taken as the amount of gold coin which the people would use, or, say, thirty millions of sovereigns, this sum would be found sufficient for all purposes to which a gold currency in India is at present likely to be applied. Thus it is clear that India can not only provide all the gold required for her own currency without drawing a single ounce of metal from the West, but also retain gold to the value of more than two hundred and forty millions for the indulgence of that propensity on the part of the people to hoard the precious metals, which those who are opposed to the use of gold money in India predict will be fatal to its circulation.—lb id., page 282. Apprehensions have been expressed in many quarters that the introduction of a gold standard in India would Involve a serious disturbance of existing contracts and financial obligations, and a dangerous derangement of the cost of trade: We desire, however, to have it clearly understood that, if it were decided to adopt a gold standard in India, we should propose a rate for the transfer from silver to gold which did not greatly differ from the market ratio of the day. We are of opinion that in such case the adoption of a gold standard would not have any serious effect In lowering prices, or reducing the rate of growth of th© land revenue, and that it would not materially affect either the opium revenue or the burden of our gold or silver debt.— Correspondence between the Government of India and the Secretary of State. London, 1893, page 12. The following is from Trade, Population, and Food, by Stephen Bourne, page 208. The author, after discussing the statistical aspect and trade requirements of gold at considerable length, concludes as follows: Do not these several observations justify the conclusion that, though at particular times and places there may be a temporary deficiency of supply, so far from there being any scarcity of gold, there never was a period in the 303 i 50 world's commerical history when the existing quantity was so large as it is at present, In proportion to the necessity for its use or the purposes it has to serve? Also from the same author: Shortly to recapitulate the several phases of this question which have thU3 passed under observation, we may observe: That basing our calculations upon the best estimates which can be obtained of the annual production of gold and silver, and comparing the assumed stock of gold With the movements of bullion and merchandise throughout the world, there appears no reason to suppose that the existing supply is not amply sufficient for all the purposes of trade as at present carried on, 2. That the general fall of prices in recent years has neither been so regular nor so closely connected with the sUpply of gold and silver as to prove that alterations in the purchasing power of the sovereign have been due wholly or chiefly to an appreciation of gold. 3. That the variations iu the value of gold itself as shown by the fluctuation in the price of the funds, and the rates of interest charged for the use of money, prove that it has no constant or unalterable value. 4. That in addition to the well-known effects on the value of silver arising from the growing yield of the American mines and the decrease in its use from its demonetization by Germany, there are others resulting from the increased quantity of gold, the facilities for economizing its use, and it's natural superioity to silver, sufficient to account in some measure for the depreciation of the inferior metal. 5. That the coincidence of tho fall in the price of silver with the contraction and depression of trade renders it probable that in this is to be found the most potent cause of depreciation, and that the revival of trade will in all probability be accompanied by a restoration of its value. 6. That it is not likely that any agreement to establish a fixed ratio in the value of silver to gold could ever be permanently maintained or not be liable \ to disruption at any moment from causes incapable of regulation or control. 7. That it is a fallacy to suppose that the extent of trade, and consequently the value of the medium through which its transactions are settled, depends so much upon the quantity of money in existence as upon the assiduous and judicious employment of productive power, the thrift by which its products are accumulated, and the wisdom which governs their consumption or expenditure.— Trade, Population, and Food, Stephen Bourne, pages 232,233. No one doubts that the amount of gold in the civilized countries of the world has largely increased in recent years. According to Dr. Soetbeer, the monetary stock of gold and gold reserve in the treasuries and principal banks of civilised countries has shown anin crease for every decade since 1850, and at the end of 18S5 was nearly four times what it was in 1850; BO that, instead of there being a reduced supply of gold, as compared with thirty-five years ago, there is a greatly increased supply. Prof. Xiaughlin estimates this increase to have been "from 3447,000,000 In 1870-'80 to $836,000,000 in 1885." In 1871-'74 there was, according to the same authority, "51 in gold for every $3.60 of the paper circulation of the banks of the civilized world; in 18® there was f1 of gold for every 52.40, the total note circulation increasing duringthe same time to the extent of $464,000,000, or 29 per cent." In 1870-74 the gold reserves amounted to 28 per cent of the total note circulation and 64per cent of all the specie reserves; in 1S85 "the gold bore a larger ratio to a larger issue of paper, or <1 per cent of the total noto circulation and 71 percent of the specie reserves. This," as;Pro*. Laughlin 303 51 remarks, "is a very significant showing. "What it means, beyond a shadow of doubt, is that the supply of gold is so abundant that tho character and safety of the not© circulation have been improved in a signal manner." The investigations of Mr. Atkinson have also led him to the conclusion that, while the population of the world since 1849 has increased about 40 per cent, the concurrent increase in the volume of the money metals has been fully 100 percent, and that the value of the gold added to the circulation during that period was more than double that of the silver added. Since 1873-'74 Germany has radically modified her metallic circulation, giving preference to and using additional gold, and the United States and Italy have resumed specie payments. But the supply of gold has been sufficient to give these nations all the gold that they required, without apparently affecting the requirements of other countries. Again, it is not disputed that tho rate of interest and discount has declined in all these countries, like Germany, the United States, Scandinavia, Holland, and Italy, which,-in recent years, tyave increased their demand and use of gold for coinage; whereas a scarcity of money resulting from a scarcity of gold ought to have produced 3'ust the contrary effect. The present annual production of gold is enormous compared with any period antecedent to 1850. Between 1820-1830 its average annual production was 5>10,000,000; between 1831-1840 it was 814,151,000, and between 1840-1850, $38,194,000. It was at Its highestfigure—$170,000,000to $180,000,000—in 1852; averaged $101,000,000 from 1881 to 1885, and (according to the estimates of the Director of the United States Mint) was $103,000,000 in 1885 and 599,000,000 in 1836. The production of silver has largely increased in recent years ($39,000,000 in 1850, $64,000,000 in 1873, and $135,000,000 in 1887), and no evidence can be produced to show that there has been any actual diminution in its aggregate use by reason of its so-called "demonetization" in any country.—Economic Changes, David A. "Wells, pages 208, 209, 210, 211. For the settlement of international balances—a large function of gold—it is certain that every ounce of this metal, through the great reduction in the time of ocean transits, is at tho present time capable of performing far more Service than at any former period; the time for the transmission of coin and bullioh having been reduced in recent years between Australia and England from ninety to forty dkys, and from New York to Liverpool from twelve or fifteen to eight or nine days. Such ah increase of rapidity in doing Work is bertainly equivalent to increase in quantity.—Ibid., page 213. The evidence, therefore, seems to fully warrant the following conclusions: That the tendency of the iige is to use continually less and less of coin in the transaction of business; and that '* so far from there being any scarcity of gold, there never was a period in the world's commercial history when the existing quantity was so large as at present in proportion to the necessity tor its use or the purposes it has to serve." The present and rapidly increasing indifference of the business public, alike in Europe and the United States, whose interest in this subject is mainly practical, is also significant, as indicating that the importance formerly conceded to the gold-scarcity theoryhas not been confirmed byexperience.™75tU, page 21S. The magnitude of the gold production since 1850 is the marked characteristic of this period. The annual yield of gold in past centuries has been insignificant in comparison with the annual production in the years following the discoveries in Australia and California. Some years before the Hussian mines had been increasing the supply; but from a production of about $15,000,000 a year in 1840, the supply ro»e to more than $150,000,000 a year soon after 1850. This phenomenon, moreover, was accompanied by an increase in the production of silver of from 25 to 50 per cent a year. 303 52 The comparative extent of the new gold production maybe seen by Chart IX, previously mentioned, which gives the yield from the mines in the years since the discovery of America. The sudden and remarkable ascent of gold product on the chart after 1850 is all the more noticeable because of the comparison with previous years. In fact, the gold production is the striking feature in this portion of our monetary history.—History of Bimetallism in the United States, byLaughlin,page 112. Setting before us as an object to discover the reasons for the fall in the value of silver in 1870—which has been the beginning of modern bimetallic discussions—we shall confine ourselves to the effect which the great production of gold has had upon the value of silver. And to this end we must bear In mind what has been said in the last section in regard to the prejudice for gold. Then there must be taken with this preference for gold the possibility of satisfying the demand. The amount of gold produced, therefore, is an important part of our problem. We should then proceed to get some idea of this amount. We find ourselves, in the period following 1850, confronted with an enormously increased production of gold. How enormous it was I do not think has been generally recognized in our monetary discussions, particularly of late in those dealing with the appreciation of gold. It seems almost Incredible to say that in the twenty-five years following 1850 as much gold was given forth by the mines as had been produced to that time since the discovery of America by Columbus; and yet it is literally true. Years. 1493-1850 1851-1875 Qold. 83,314,553,000 3,317,625,000 Silver. S7,358,450,000 1,395,125,000 The facts may be more conveniently seen in their proper relations in chapter 10, which represents, first, by square areas the total quantities of gold and silver produced since the discovery of America down to 1850. During this time of three hundred and fifty-seven years it will be seen that more than twice as much sliver as gold, in respect to value, was produced. And we have already seen that in this period there occurred two great falls in the value of silver, or at least an almost continuous fall of silver (see chapter 4). But what is remarkable is that while gold to an amount so much more than enough for the ordinary uses of commerce was produced from 1493 to 1850 that it fell in Its purchasing power, in the twenty-five years succeeding 1850 an amount equal to the product of the previous three hundred and fifty-seven years was suddenly added to the existing stock of the world. This was an amount far more than was necessary for the growth of trade and population in those twenty-five years, and, as Prof Jevons has shown, it resulted in a loss of its purchasing power of from 9 to 15 per cent. The wonder is that its value did not fall more, and it would have fallen more if it had not been for the influences which, as we shall later see, widened the field for its use. * • * Now, what was the effect upon the relative values of the two metals ot suddenly doubling the quantity of gold, without anything like a proportional increase of silver? First of all, gold fell in value, both in regard to silver and to all commodities. The ratio between gold and silver, which had risen from 1 to 15 to 1 to 16, now showed the effect of the cheapening in gold by dropping to 1 to 15.3 for a time. This was the first effect. But a second effect soon became visible. The cheapened gold began to drive out silver from the currencies of the United States and Europe, because at former ratios, fixed 303 53 fore the gold discoveries, gold was overvalued at the mints, and so by Gresham'^law came into circulation as the sole medium of exchange. But the matter worthy of most attention is that this exchange of gold for silver was seen and watched, not only without opposition, but even with satisfaction. Had there been a similar flow of silver into the place of gold, there would have been no such complacency. Here again is the preference for gold which we find so constantly present. The effect of this movement was, of course, to prevent gold from falling in value as much as it would otherwise have done, and to withdraw the previously existing demand from silver for use a3 a medium of exchange in Western commercial nations. The very cheapness and abundance of gold increased the demand for itTfor use as a medium of exchange, and ipso facto diminished the demand for silver. The world could choose between the two. There was silver enough; but as soon as gold became plentiful there was no doubt for a moment which metal was preferred. It was in the same spirit in which the modern world made choice between the railway and the stage coach as a means of transportation. Wherever choice was possible, the best and most convenient means of locomotion was taken.—Ibid, pages 115,116,117. The following clipping is from an article which appeared in the New York Evening Post of August 21,1893, by the above author: SOME THOUGHTS ON THE PRESENT CRISIS—THE SUPPLY OF GOLD. ., Calm reflection upon facts constantly overlooked may lead us to believe that the consensus of opinion among the large commercial states of Europe in favor of the gold standard is not based on flimsy ground. From 1493 to 1850 the world's production of silver was 87,353,450,000, and of gold $3,314,553,000—or more than twice as much silver as gold. From 1851 to 1891 the world's production of silver was $2,967,444,000, and of gold 85,072,410,000—or nearly twice as much gold as silver. In the United States alone the gold production has been about twice as large as silver; from 1792 to 1891 that of silver was 51,073,172,000, and that of gold 51,904,881,769. The 55,072,410,000 of gold produced in the forty years since 1850 has filled the channels of circulation in Europe and America, and permitted the disuse of silver. The resumption of gold payments by the United States in 1879, and the adoption of the gold standard by Germany, Denmark, Scandinavia, Italy, and Austria-Hungary, have not required, at the outside, more than 51,000,000,000 or 81,500,000,000, leaving more than 53,000,000,009 for general uses, exclusive of the stock existing in 1850, which is about as much more. Never before have the paper currencies of the world been better secured by gold reserves. There is in sight to-day more than 5500,000,000 in gold in thereserves of the banks of Europe alone. In view of these facts, it does not seem wise to feel any doubt of the ability of the United States, with its untold resources and exportable products, to keep intact its small reserve of 5100,000,000, or double that sum, which it should be. Nor, in view of these fact3, should too much weight be assigned to the argument that general prices Have fallen because of the demonetization of flilver in 1873; the less so when it is remembered that Germany took to herself only about 5400,000,000 of gold and discarded the same amount of silver. In short, apart from the action of Germany, silver is as much used now in ail the other States of Europe as in 1873. If the giving up of silver by Germany lowered the level of prices for the world, then the action of this country in buying as much silver as Germany discarded ought to have restored the former level. That it did not shows how untenable is the posi303 54 tlon that prices have fallen because silver was demonetized or that prices can he regulated by legislative action in increasing or diminishing either gold or silver. In short, prices can never be fixed by the mere quantity of metallic money in the country. They depond much more on conditions of credit and banking. If this is properly understood it will, be possible to see how debts can be paid without the infusion of more silver into our currency as easily as ever before. The only means of paying debts, In fact, are salable goods, for they can always be changed Into a means of payment. The increased output of gold in the United States for the first six months of 1893 amounts to $1,100,000, and it is estimated by competent authority that the increased output for the world for the year 1893 over that of 1892 will amount to at least $8,000,000. The following is taken from the editorial columns of the Washington Post, August 18,1893: OUR GOLD PRODUCT. The chief risk of dependence on gold as a standard is that the supply may not bo sufficient, but the gold fields of South Africa, now being developed, promise to bring relief in that direction.—Philadelphia Ledger. But what about our own gold fields? Wherever gold has been produced before in years gone by prospecting has been renewed with most encouraging results. New discoveries have been made in Oregon and other Western States that are reputed to be very valuable. Even in Colorado, the very heart of the silver industry, the outlook for gold is brightening daily. Says the Denver Republican of August 14: "Already there has been a notable increase in the gold output. The gold deposits at the Denver mint in July exceeded by $60,000 the deposits in any previous month in the history of the mint. It shows that Colorado miners are not completely at the mercy of the men who are endeavoring to strike down silver as a money metal. There are promising gold districts in both Gunnison and Pitkin Counties. Telluride is one of the best gold camps in the Rocky Mountains, and during this summer a large amount of work has been done there in the development of gold claims, which, during the time of active silver mining, were more or less neglected. Gilpin County keeps up its reputation as a gold producer, and the camp on Yankee Hill near the edge of Clear Creek Comity Is a very promising place." The San Francisco Examiner of the 11th instant reports that gold is coming down from the mountains at the rate of $1,500,000 a month; that "the corner of the hard times " has been turned; that money enough is to be had for saving the bulk of the fruit crop, and that wheat is rushing to market, every cargo shipped yielding §50,000 to 8100,000 in " English gold " as soon aa it is cleared. There is no cause of alarm because of a probable scarcity of gold for a currency reserve. What the country does not produce the Government can easily buy. IN CONCLUSION. A s to the direful calamity which the advocates of free silver promise us will surely befall the country if we adopt the gold standard by passing the pending bill—the scarcity of money, the fall of prices, commercial depression and increase of poverty— I quote once more from that old stalwart, hard-money, gold203 55 standard Democrat from Missouri—of a past generation, Hon. Thomas H. Benton: A measure of relief was now at hand, before which the machinery of distress was to balk and cease its long and cruel labors: it was the passage of the bill for equalizing the value of gold and silver and legalising the tender of foreign coins of both metals. The bills were brought forward into the House by Mr. Campbell P. White, of New York, and passed after an animated contest, in which the chief question was as to the true relative value of the two metals, varied by some into a preference for national bank paper. Fifteen andfive-eighthsto 1 was the ratio of nearly all who seemed best calculated, from their pursuits, to understand the subject. The thick array of speakers was on that side, and the eighteen banks of the city of New York, with Mr. Gallatin at their head, favored that proportion. The difficulty of adjusting this value, so that neither metal should expel the other, had been the stumbling block for a great many year3, and now this difficulty seemed to be as formidable as ever. We find calculations were gone Into; scientific light was sought; history was rummaged back to the times of the Roman Empire; and there seemed to be no way of getting to a concord of opinion either from the lights of science, the voice of history, or the result of calculation. The author of this View had (in his speeches on the subject) taken up the question in a practical point of view, regardless of history and calculations and the opinions of bank officers; and looking to the actual and the equal circulation of the two metals indifferent countries, he saw that this equality and actuality of circulation had existed for about three hundred years in the Spanish dominions of Mexico and South America, where the proportion was 16 to 1. Taking his stand upon this single fact as the practical test that solved the question, all the real friends of gold currency soon rallied to it. Mr. White gave up the bill which he had first introduced, and adopted the Spanish ratio. Mr. Clowney of South Carolina, Mr. Gillet, and Mr. Cambreeng of New York, Mr. Ewing of Indiana, Mr. McKim of Maryland, and the other speakers, gave it a warm support. Mf. John Quincy Adams would vote for it though he thought that gold was overvalued; but if found to be so, the difference could be corrected hereafter. The principal speakers against it and in favor of a lower rate were Messrs. Gorham, of Massachusetts, Selden of New York, Binney of Pennsylvania, and Wilde of Georgia. And eventually the bill was passed by a large majority—145 to 36, In the Senate it had an easy passage. Mr. Calhoun and Webster supported it; Mr. Clay opposed it; and on the final vo to there were but 7 negatives: Messrs. Chambers of Maryland, Clay, Knight of Rhode Island, Alexander Porter of Louisiana, Silsbee of Massachusetts, Southard of New Jersey, Sprague ot Maine. The good ©fleets of the bill were immediately seen. Gold began to flow into the country through all the channels of commerce; old chests gave up their hoards; the mint was busy, and in a few months, and as if by magic, a currency banished from the country for thirty years, overspread the land, and gave joy and confidence to all the pursuits of industry. But this joy was not universal. A large interest connected with the Bank of the United States, and its subsidiary and subaltern Institutions, and the whole paper Bystem, vehemently opposed it, and spared neither pains nor expense to check its circulation and to bring odium upon its supporters. People were alarmed with counterfeits. Gilt counters were exhibited in the markets, to alarm the ignorant. The coin itself was burlesqued, In mock imitation of brass or copper, with grotesque figures, and ludicrous inscriptions—the "wholehog" and the "better currency," being the favorite 803 66 devices. Many newspapers expended their daily wit in its stale depreciation. The most exalted of the paper money party would recoil a step when it was offered to them, and begged for paper. The name of "Gold humbug" was fastened upon the person supposed to have been chiefly instrumental in bringing the derided coin into existence; and he, not to be abashed, made it3 eulogy a standing theme—vaunting its excellence, boasting its coming abundance, to spread over the land, flow up the Mississippi, shine through the interstices of the long silken purse, and to be locked up safely in the farmer's trusty oaken chest. For a year there was a real war of the paper against gold. But there was something that was an overmatch for the arts or power of the paper system in this particular, and which needed no persuasions to guide it when it had its choice; it was the instinctive feeling of the masses which told them that money which would jingle in the pocket was the right money for them—that hard money was the right money for hard hands—that gold was the true currency for every man that had anything true to give for it, either in labor or property; and upon these instinctive feelings gold became the avidious demand of the vast operating and producing classes.—Benton's Thirty Tears' View, volume 1, chapter 58. The extent of suffering which follows in the wake of a cheap and unstable currency can not be overestimated. ,It stops all development and curtails all existing enterprises; it reduces the income of capital and the wages of labor; it increases the cost of living; it displaces confidence with suspicion, turns all merchandising into speculation, and destroys public and private credit. There can be no public credit, nor private credit, nor individual prosperity unless the money of the realm, which measures all services, all wages, all property, shall be free from suspicion and of sound and stable value. APPENDIX. The pending bill and order of the House for its consideration. A bill (H. R. 1) to repeal apart of an act, approved July 14,1890, entitled "An act directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes." Be it enacted, etc., That so much of the act approved July 14,^1890, entitled "An act directing the purchase of silver bullion and issue of Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes," as directs the Secretary of the Treasury to purchase from time to time silver bullion to the aggregate amount of 4,500,000 ounces, or so much thereof as may be offered in each month at the market price thereof, not exceeding $1 for 371.25 grains of pure silver, and to issue in payment for such purposes Treasury notes of the United States, be, and the same is hereby, repealed; but this repeal shall not impair, or in any manner affect, the legal-tender quality of the standard silver dollars heretofore coined; and the faith and credit of the United States are hereby pledged to maintain the parity of the standard gold and silver coins of the United States at the present legal ratio or such other ratio as may be established by law. SS O 57 The Order. Ordered by the Rouse, That H. R. No. 1 shall he taken up for immediate consideration and considered for fourteen days. During such consideration night sessions may be held, for debate only, at the request of either side. The daily sessions to commence at 11 a. m. and continue until 5 p.m. Eleven days of the debate on the bill to be given to general debate under the rules of the last House regulating general debate, the time to be equally divided between the two sides as the Speaker may determine. The last three days of debate may be devoted to the consideration of the bill and the amendments herein provided for, under the usual five-minute rule of the House, as in Committee of the "Whole House. General leave to print is hereby granted. Order of amendments: The vote shall be taken first on anamendmentproviding for the free coinage of silver at the present ratio. If that fail, then a separate vote to be had on a similar amendment proposing a ratio of 17 to 1; if that fails, on one proposing a ratio of 18 to 1; if that fails, on one proposing a ratio of 19 to 1; if that fails, on one proposing a ratio of 20 to 1. If the above amendments fail, it shall be in order to offer an amendment reviving the act of the 28th of February, 1878, restoring the standard silver dollar, commonly known as the Bland-Allison act; the vote then to betaken on the engrossment and third reading of the bill as amended, or on the bill itself if all amendments shall have been voted down, and on the final passage of the bill without other intervening motions. The law of July 14,1890, commonly called the Sherman law. [Fublic-NO. 214.] An act directing the purchase of silver bullion and the issue of Treasury notes thereon, and for other purposes. Be it enacted, etc., That the Secretary of the Treasury is hereby directed to purchase, from time to time, silver bullion to the aggregate amount of 4,500,000 ounces, or so much thereof as may be offered in each month, at the market price thereof, not exceeding $1 for 371.25 grains of pure silver, and to issue in payment for such purchases of silver bullion Treasury notes of the United States to be prepared by the Secretary of the Treasury, in such form and of such denominations, not less than $1 nor more than $1,000, as he may prescribe, and a sum sufficient to carry into effect the provisions of this act is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. SEC. 2. That the Treasury notes issued in accordance with the provisions of this act shall be redeemable on demand, in coin, at the Treasury of the United States, or at the office of any assistant treasurer of the United States, and when so redeemed may be reissued; but no greater or less amount of such notes shall be outstanding,at any time than the cost of the silver bullion and the standard silver dollars coined therefrom, then held in the Treasury, purchased by such notes; and such Treasury notes shall be a-legal tender in payment of all debts, public and private, except where otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract, and shall be receivable for customs, taxes, and all public dues, and when so received may be reissued; and such notes, when held by any national banking association, may be counted as a part of its lawful reserve. 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. 803 58 Sec. 3. That the Secretary of the Treasury shall each month coin 2,000,000 ounces of the silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act into standard silver dollars until tho 1st day of July, 1S91, and after that time he shall coin of the silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act as much as may be necessary to provido for the redemption of the Treasury notes herein provided for, and any gain or seigniorage arising from such coinage shall be accounted for and paid into the Treasury. SEC. 4. That the silver bullion purchased under the provisions of this act shall be subject to the requirements of existing law and the regulations of , the mint service governing the methods of determining the amount of pure silver contained, and the amount of charges or deductions, if any, to be made. SEC. 5. That so much of the act of February 28,1878, entitled " An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dollar and to restore its legaltender character," as requires the monthly purchase and coinage of the same into silver dollars of not less than $2,000,000 nor more than $1,000,000 worth of silver bullion, is hereby repealed. SEC. 6. That upon the passage of this act the balances standing with the Treasurer of the United States to the respective credits of national banks for deposits made to redeem the circulating notes of such banks, and all deposits thereafter received for like purpose, shall be covered into the Treasury as a miscellaneous receipt, and the Treasurer of the United States shall redeem from the general cash in the Treasury the circulating notes of said banks which may come into his possession subject to redemption; and upon the certificate of the Comptroller of the Currency that such note3 have been received by him and that they have been destroyed and that no new notes will be issued in theirplace, reimbursement of their amount shall be made to the Treasurer, under such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury may prescribe, from an appropriation hereby created, to be known asnational-bank notes redemption account; but the provisions of this act shall not apply to the deposits received under section 3 of the act of June 20,1S74, requiring every national bank to keep in lawful money with the Treasurer of the United States a sum equal to five percent of its circulation, to be held and used for the redemption of its circulating notes; and the balance remaining of the deposits so covered shall, at the close of each month, be reported on the monthly public debt statement as debt of the United States bearing no interest. SEC. 7. That this act shall take effect thirty days from and after its passage. Approved July 14,1890. The act of February 28% 1878, commonly called the Bland-Allison act, An act to authorize the coinage of the standard silver dollar, and to restore its legal-tender character. Beit enacted, etc., That there shall be coined, at the several mints of the United States, silver dollars of the weight of 412$ grains troy of standard silver, as provided in the act of January 18,1837, on which shall be the devices and superscriptions provided by said act; which coins, together with all silver dollars heretofore coined by the United States, of like weight and fineness, shall be a legal tender, at their nominal value* for all debts and dues, public and private, except where otherwise expressly stipulated in the contract. And the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to purchase, from time to time, silver bullion at the market price thereof, not less than 82,000,000 worth per month nor more than S4,000,000worth per month, and cause the same to be coined monthly, as fast as so purchased,, into such dollars; and a sum sufficient to carry out the foregoing provision of this 803 59 act is hereby appreciated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. And any gain or seigniorage arising from this coinage shall be accounted for and paid into the Treasury, as provided under existing laws relative to tho subsidiary coinage: Provided, That the amount of money at any one time invested in such silver bullion, exclusive of such resulting coin, shall not exceed five million dollars; Andprovided further, That nothing in this act shall be construed to authorize the payment in silver of certificates of deposit issued under the provisions of section 254 of the Revised Statutes. SEC. 2. That immediately after the passage of this act the President shall invite the governments of the countries comprising the Latin Union, so called, and of such other European nations as he may deem advisable, to join the United States in a conference to adopt a common ratio between gold and silver, for the purpose of establishing, internationally, the use of bimetallic money and securing fixity of relative value between those metals, such conference to be held at such place, in Europe or the United States, at such time within six months, as may be mutually agreed upon by the executives of the governments joining in the same, whenever the governments so invited, or any three of them, shall have signified their willingness to unite in the same. The President shall, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, appoint three commissioners, who shall attend such conference on behalf of the United States, and shall report the doings thereof to the President, who shall transmit the same to Congress. Said commissioners shall each receive the sum of $2,500 and their reasons* ble expenses, to be approved by the Secretary of State, and the amount necessary to pay such compensation and expenses is hereby appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated. SEC. 3. That any holder of the coin authorized by this act may deposit the same-with the Treasurer or any assistant treasurer of the United States, in sums not less than $10, and receive therefor certificates of not less than $10 each, corresponding with the denominations of the United States notes. The coin deposited for or representing the certificate shall be retained in the Treasury for the payment of the same on demand. Said certificates shall be receivable for customs, taxes, and all public dues, and, when so received, may be reissued. SEC. 4. All acts and parts of acts inconsistent with the provisions of this act are hereby repealed. Relating to the act of 1873 demonetizing sliver. [Extract from speech of Hon. A. S. Hewitt, of New York, in tho House ol Representatives, August 5, 1876.] On April 25,1870, the Secretary of the Treasury transmitted the following letter to Hon.JOHIT SHEEMACT, chairman of the Finance Committee of the Senate: " TREASURY DEPARTMENT, April 25, isio. " SIB : I have the honor to transmit herewith a bill revising the laws relative to the Mint, assay offices, and coinage of the United States, and accompanying report. The bill has been prepared under the supervision of John Jay Knox, Deputy Comptroller of the Currency, and its passage is recommended in the form presented. It includes in a condensed form, all the important legislation upon the coinage, not now obsolete, since the first mint was established, in 1792; and the report gives a concise statement of the various amendments proposed to existing laws and the necessity for the change recommended. There has been no revision of the laws pertaining to the Mint and coinage 60 since 1837, and It is believed that the passage of the inclosed bill will conduce greatly to the efficiency and economy of this important branch or the Government servica " I am, very respectfully, your obedient servant, "GEO. S. BOUTWELL, "Secretary of the Treasury The report and the bill were referred on April S3,1870, to the Finance Committee of the Senate, and subsequently, on May 2,1870,500 additional copies were ordered to be printed for the use of the Treasury Department. The report says: " The method adopted in the preparation of the bill was first to arrange in as concise a form as possible the laws nowin existence upon these subjects, with such additional sections and suggestions as seemed valuable. Having accomplished this, the bill, as thus prepared, was printed upon paper with wide margin, and in this form transmitted to the different mints and assay offices, to the First Comptroller, the Treasurer, the Solicitor, the First Auditor, and to such other gentlemen as are known to be intelligent upon metallurgical and numismatic subjects, with the request that the printed bill should be returned with such notes and suggestions as experience and education should dictate. In this way the views of more than thirty gentlemen who are conversant with the manipulation of metals, the manufacture of coinage, the execution of the present laws relative thereto, the method of keeping accounts, and of making returns to the Department, havo been obtained with but little expense to the Department and little inconvenience to correspondents. Having received these suggestions, the present bill has been framed, and it is believed to comprise within the compass of eight or ten pages of the Be vised Statutes every important provision contained in more than sixty different enactments upon the Mint, assay offices, and coinage of the United States, which are theresult of nearly eighty years of legislation upon these subjects." The amendments proposed by the bill were as follows: PROPOSE© AMENDMENTS. "The new features of the bill now submitted are chiefly: The establishment of a mint bureau at the Treasury Department, which shall also have charge of the collection of statistics relative to the precious metals; the consolidation of the office of superintendent with that of the Treasurer, thus abolishing the latter office and disconnecting the Mint entirely from the office of assistant treasurer; the repeal of the coinage charge, and authorizing the exchange of imparted for refined bars; a reduction in the amount of wastage, and the tolerance (deviation in weight and fineness) in the manufacture of coin; requiring the token coinage to be of one material of uniform value, and to be redeemed under proper regulations when issued in excess, and the expense of its manufacture to be paid from specific appropriations, and not from the gain arising in its manufacture, as heretofore; an entire change in the manner of issuing the silver (subsidiary) coinage: discontinuing the coinage of the silver dollar; limiting the amount of silver to be used as alloy, so as to make the gold coinage of uniform color; the destruction of the dies not in use annually; requiring vouchers to pass between the different officers of the Mint in all transfers of bullion or coin; requiring Increased bends from officers of the Mint, and authorizing each officer to nominate his subordinate before appointment; and also making it an offense to increase or diminish the weights used In the Mint." The report of Mr. Knox called special attention to the discontinuance of the silver dollar as a standard, as may be seen from the following paragraph on page 11: 303 61 " S I L V E R DOLLAR—ITS DISCONTINUANCE A3 A STANDARD. •'The coinage of the silver-dollar piece, the history of which is here given, is discontinued in the proposed bill. It is by law the dollar unit and, assuming the value of gold to be fifteen and one-half times that of silver, being about the mean ratio for the past six years, is worth in gold a premium of about 3 per cent (its value being 103.12) and intrinsically more than 7 per cent premium in our other silver coins, its value thug being 107.42. The present laws consequently authorize both a gold-dollar unit and a silverdollar unit, differing from each other in intrinsic value. The present golddollar piece is made the dollar unit in the proposed bill and the silver-dollar piece is discontinued. If, however, such a coin is authorized, it should be issued only as a commercial dollar, not as a standard unit of account, and of the exact value of the Mexican dollar, which is the favorite for circulation in China and Japan and other Oriental countries." The appendix to the report contained a copy of the English coinage act of 1870, and four tables giving (1} the existing coinage, including the silver dollar; (2) the proposed coinage in which the silver dollar was omitted: (3) a metric system of coinage suggesting the issue of a subsidiary silver coinage consisting of two half-dollars constituting in weight and fineness an exact equivalent to the French five-franc piece, and a quarter-dollar and dime with proportionate weight and fineness, which proposition was finally adopted; (4) a table giving a comparison of coinage existing and proposed. A note at the foot of this table states that the silver dollar, half-dim® and three-cent piece are omitted in the proposed bill. Subsequently, on June 25,1870, the Secretary of the Treasury transmitted to the House of Representatives a letter of the then Deputy Comptroller of the Currency, together with copies of the correspondence of the Department with the officers of tbe different mints, assay offices, and other experts in reference to tho bill and report previously submitted. The bill in its original form, which was transmitted to the correspondents throughout the country for consideration and comment, contained the following section, as appears from the manuscript copy at the Treasury Department: "SEC. 15. And be it further enacted, That of the silver coins [the weight of the dollar shall be 334 grains] (now 4121 grains) the weight of the half-dollar or piece of 50cents shall be 192 grains; a&d that the quarter-dollar and dime Land half-dime] shall be, respectively, one-half and one-fifth [and one-tenth] of tho weight of said half-dollar. That the silver coin issued in conformity with the above sections shall be a legal tender in any one payment of debts for all sums (.not exceeding 55, except duties on imports] less than $1." If th© words inclosed in [brackets] of tbe section as here given are excluded and the words in italics Included, the section will conform precisely to the section which was transmitted to Congress and which passed the Senate on January 9,1871. The dollar of 384 grains was proposed in the rough revision of the bill for the purpose of obtaining an expression of opinion in reference to the proposed omission of the dollar piece and the words "except duties on imports " inserted for the reason that a regulation or usage at the customhouse in New York limits the payment of silver coins to the fractional parts of a dollar, except when the payment to be made is f6 or less. Several gentlemen in their criticisms upon the rough revision of the bill referred to this section. Hon. James Pollock, the Director of the Mint at Philadelphia, said: " SEC. 11. The reduction of the weight of the whole dollar is approved, and was recommended in my annual report of 1861." (Page 10.) Mr. Bobert Patterson, of Philadelphia* sent to Mr. Knox same notes on 803 62 the bill suggesting amendments. He called attention to one of these in the following words: " The silver dollar, half-dime, and three-cent piece are dispensed with by this amendment. Gold becomes the standard money, of which the gold dollar is the unit. Silver is subsidiary, embracing coins from the dime to halfdollar; coins less than the dime are of copper-nickel. The legal tender is limited to ^necessities of the case; not more than a dollar for such silver or 15 cents for the nickels." Mr. Franklin Peale, formerly melter and refiner and chief coiner of the mint at Philadelphia, recommended the discontinuance of the three and one dollar gold pieces, and supplying the place of the latter with a proper silver coin to be used as change. Dr. H. K. Linderman, the present Director of the Mint^ said: " Section 11 reduces the weight of the silver dollar from 412£ to 384 grains. I can see no good reason for the proposed reduction in the weight of this coin. It would be better, in my opinion, to discontinue its issue altogether. The gold dollar is really the legal unit and measure of value. Having a higher valuo as bullion than its nominal value, the silver dollar long ago ceased to be a coin of circulation; and /being of no practical use whatever, its issue should be discontinued." Mr. James Ross Snowden, formerly Director of the Mint, said: " I see that It is proposed to demonetize the silver dollar. This I think unadvisable. Silver coins below the dollar are now not money In a proper sense, but only tokens. I do not like the Idea of reducing the silver dollar to that level. It is quite true that the silver dollar, beinfr more valuable than two half-dollars or lour quarter-dollars, will not be used as a circulating medium, but only for cabinets and perhaps to supply some occasional or local demand; yet I think there is no necessity for so considerable a piece as the dollar to be struck from metal which is only worth 94 cents. When we speak of dollars let it be known that we speak of dollars not demonetized and reducedbelow their intrinsic value, and thus avoid the introduction of contradictory and loose ideas of the standards of value." Mr. George F. Dunning, formerly superintendent of the United States assayoface in New York, proposed, that the law In regard to the silver coinage should be in the following language: "SEO.11. Andbeit further enacted, That the silver coins of the United States shall bo a dollar, a half-dollar, a quarter-dollar, a dime or tenth of a dollar, and a half-dime or twentieth of a dollar; and the standard weight of the silver coins shall be in the proportion of 384 grains to the dollar, and these coins shall be a legal tender in all payments not exceeding §5." The officers of the San Francisco branch mint made the following suggestions: "Section 11. Would not the proposed change in the weight of the silver dollar disturb the relative value of all our coinage, affect our commercial conventions, and possibly impair the validity of contracts running through a long period? Might not the dollar be retained as a measure of value, but the coinage of the piece for circulation be discontinued?" Mr. E. B. Elliott, of the Treasury Department, gave a complete history of the silver dollar, and suggested the Issue of a commercial dollar of ninetenths fineness, and containing of pure silver just 25 grams, in place of the then existing silver dollar of 412f grains, the proposed silver dollar being almost the exact equivalent of the silver contained in the older Spanish-Mexican pillared dollar, established in 1704 by proclamation of Queen Anne as a legal tender of payment and accepted as par of exchange for the British colonies of North America at the rate of 54 pence sterling to the dollar, or 4$ dollars to the pound sterling. 303 63 On December 19,1870, the bill was reported from the Finance Committee of the Senate and printed with amendments. On January 9,1871, in accordance with previous notice, the bill came before the Senate, and was discussed during that day and the following day by Senators SHERMAN, Sumner, Bayard, STEWART of Nevada, Williams, Casserly, MORRILL, and others, and passed the Senate on the 10th by a vote of 36 yeas to 14 nays. On January 13,1871, on motion of Hon. William D. Kelley, the Senate bill was ordered to be printed. On February 25,1871, Mr. Kelley, the chairman of the Committee on Coinage, "reported the bill back with an amendment in the nature of a substitute, when it was again printed and recommitted. Mr. Kelley again on March 9,1871, introduced the^bill in the Forty-second Congress, when it was ordered to be printed, and referred to the Committee on Coinage, when appointed. On January 9, 1872, the bill was reported by Mr. Kelley, chairman of the Coinage Committee, with the recommendation that it pass. The bill wa-s read and discussed at length by Messrs. Kelley, Potter, Garfield, Maynard, Dawes, HOLMAN, and others. Mr. Kelley, in the opening speech, said: "The Senate took up the bill and acted upon it during the last Congress, and sent it to the House; it was referred to the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures, and received as careful attention as I have ever known a committee to bestow on any measure. C ¥ * # P # U "We proceeded with great deliberation to go over the bill, not only section by section, but line by line, and word by word; the bill has not received the same elaborate consideration from the Committee on Coinage of this House, but the attention of each member was brought to it at the earliest day of this session; each member procured a copy of the bill and there has been a thorough examination of the bill again."— Congressional Globe, volume 100, page 322. Mr. Kelley on the same day also said: "There are one or two things in this bill I will say to the gentleman from New York, with his permission, which I personally would like to modify; that is to say, t would like to follow the example of England and make a wide difference between our silver and gold coinage. • * would have liked to have made the gold dollar uniform with the French system of weights, taking the gram as the unit." (Page 323, volume 100.) On January 10,1872, the bill after considerable discussion was again recommitted, and on February 9,1872, it was again reported from the Coinage Committee by Hon. Samuel Hooper, printed and recommitted, and on February, 13,1872, reported back by Mr. Hooper with amendments, printed, and made the special order for March 12,1872, until disposed of. On April 9, 1872, the bill came up in the House for consideration. Mr. Hooper in a carefully prepared speech of ten columns, explained the provisions of each section of the bill. In this speech (page 2308, volume 102, of the Congressional Globe) he says: "SectIonl6 reenacts the provisions of theexisting laws defining the silver coins and their weights, respectively, except in relation to the silver dollar, which is reduced in weight from 412J to 384 grains, thus making it a subsidiary coin in harmony with the silver coins of less denomination to secure its concurrent circulation with them. The silver dollar of 412J grains, by reason of Its bullion or intrinsic value being greater than its nominal value, long since ceased to be a coin of circulation, and is melted by manufacturers of silverware. It does not circulate now in commercial transactions with any country, and the convenience of these manufacturers in this respect can 303 64 better be met by supplying small stamped bars of the same standard, avoiding the useless expense of coining the dollar for that purpose." Mr. Stoughton, of the Coinage Committee, also made a speech of seven columns, in which he says: "The silver coins provided for are the dollar, SS4 grains troy, the half-dollar, quarter-dollar, and dime, of the value and weight of one-half, one-quarter, and one-tenth of the dollar, respectively, and they are made a legal tender for all sums not exceeding $5 at any one payment. The silver dollar, as now issued, is worth for bullion 3} cents more than the gold dollar and 71 cents more than two half-dollars; having a greater intrinsic and nominal value, it is certain to be withdrawn from circulation whenever we return to specie payment, and to be used for Only manufacture and exportation as bullion." The latter, in commenting upon the bill, says: "Mr. Speaker, this is a bill of importance. When it was before the House in the early part of this session I took some objections to it which I am inclined now to think, in view of all the circumstances, were not entirely well founded, but after further reflection X am still convinced that it is a measure which it is hardly worth while for us to adopt at this time. * • * This bill provides for the making of changes in the legal-tender coin of the country and for substituting as legal-tender coin of only one metal instead as heretofore of two. I think myself this would be a wise provision, and that legal-tender coins, except subsidiary coin, should be of gold alone; but why should we legislate on this now when we are not using either of those metals as a circulating medium? "The bill provides also for a change in respect of the weight and value of the silver dollar, which I think is a subject which, when we come to require legislation about it at ail, will demand at our hands very serious consideration, and which, as we are not using such coins for circulation now, seems at this time to be an unnecessary subject about which to legislate." (Page 2310, volume 102.) Mr. Kelley also said: " I wish to ask the gentleman who has just spoken [Mr. Potter] if he knows of any government in the world which makes its subsidiary coinage of full value. The silver coin of England Is 10 per cent below the value of gold coin, and, acting under the advice of the experts of this country, and of England and France, Japan has made her silver coinage within the last year 12 per cent below the value of gold coin, and for this reason: It is impossible to retain the double standard. The values of gold and silver continually fluctuate. You can not determine this year what will be the relative values of gold and silver next year. They were 15 to 1 a short time ago; they are 16 to 1 now. "Hence all experience has shown that you must have one standard coin which shall be a legal tender for all others, and then you may promote your domestic convenience by having a subsidiary coinage of silver, which shall circulate in all parts of your country as legal tender for a limited amount and be redeemable at its face value by your Government. But, sir, I again call the attention of the House to the fact that the gentlemen who oppose this bill insist upon maintaining a silver dollar worth 3J cents more than the gold dollar and worth 7 cents more than two half dollars, and that so long as those provisions remain you can not keep silver coin in the country." On May 27,1872, the bill was again called up by Mr. Hooper for the purpose of offering an amendment in the nature of a substitute, and the bill as amended passed that day—yeas 110, nays 13. Just previous to the passage of the hill Mr. McNeely, of the Coinage Committee, said: 303 65 "As a member of the Committee on Coinage, Weights, and Measures/having carefully examined every section and line of this bill and generally understanding the subject before us, I am satisfied that the bill ought to pass." (Page 3883, volume 104.) The substitute reported by Mr. Hooper and passed by the House, so far as it refers to silver coinage, was identical with the bill previously reported from the Coinage Committee by him. It was also identical with the bill introduced by Mr. Kelley, with the single exception of the provision authorizing the coinage of a silver dollar weighing384 grains. The bill of Mr. Kelley, so far as it related to the silver coinage, was identical with the bill which was prepared at the Treasury Department, and which had passed the Senate, excepting that the latter bill made the silver coin a legal tender for all stuns less than 51, while the bill of Mr. Kelley made the silver coins a legal tender for $5 in any one payment. The bill was again printed in the Senate on May 29, 1872, and referred to the Finance Committee. Senator SHERMAN, in reporting it back on December 16,1872, said: "This bill has, in substance, passed both Houses, except that the Senate bill enlarged and increased the salaries of the officers of the Mint; it was passed by the Senate at the session of the last Congress, went to the House, and now, somewhat modified, has passed the House at this Congress, so that the bill has practically passed both Houses of Congress. The Senate Committee on Finance propose a modification of only a single section; but as this is not the same Congress that passed the bill in the Senate, I suppose it will have to go through the form of a full reading unless the Senate are willing to take it on the statement of the committee, the Senate already having debated it and passed it." (Page 203, volume 106, third session Forty-second Congress.) After further debate, on motion of Mr. Cole, the bill was printed in full with amendments. On January 7,1873, it was again reported with amendments and again printed for the Information of the Senate. It passed that body on January 17,1873, after a discussion occupying nineteen columns of the Congressional Globe. In the course of the debate Senator SHERMAN said: "This bill proposes a silver coinage exactly the same as the French and what are called the associated nations of Europe, who have adopted the international standard of silver coinage; that is, the dollar [two half-dollars] provided for by this bill is the precise equivalent of a 5-franc piece. It contains the same number of grams of silver, and we have adopted the international gram instead of the grain for the standard of our silver coinage. The trade dollar has been adopted mainly for the benefit of the people of California and others engaged in trade with China. " That is the only coin measured by the grain instead of by the gram. The intrinsic value of each is to be stamped upon the coin. The Chamber of Commerce of New York recommended this change, and it has been adopted, I believe, by all the learned societies who have given attention to coinage, and has been recommended to us, I believe, as the general desire. That is embodied in these three or four sections of amendment to make our silver coinage correspond in exact form and dimensions and shape and stamp with the coinage of the associated nations of Europe, who have adopted an international silver coinage." (Page 672, volume 106, third session, Fortysecond Congress.) The bill was sent to the House, and on January 21,1873, on motion of Mr. Hooper, it was again printed with amendments, and subsequently committees of conference were appointed, consisting of Messrs. Hooper, Houghton, %nd McNeely, of the House, and Senators SHERMAN, Scott, and Bayard, of the Senate. The reports of the committees of conference were agreed to, 303 5 66 and the hill became a law on February 12,1873, substantially as originally prepared at the Treasury. The bill as prepared at the Treasury omitted the silver-dollar piece, and the report stated the fact of its omission three different times and gave the reasons therefor. The silver-dollar piece was omitted from the bill as it first passed the Senate. It was also omitted from the bills reported by Mr. Kelley; but in the bills reported by Mr. Hooper a new silver dollar was proposed equal in weight (S84 grains) to two of the half-dollars then authorized. ^The Senate substituted a trade dollar weighing 420 grains ill place of the dollar of 384 grains, in accordance with the •wishes of the dealers in bullion upon the Pacific coast, that being considered by them as the most advantageous weight for a coin to be used for shipment to China and japan. The weight of the subsidiary silver coin was increased about one-half percent in value, making the half dollar, quarter dollar, and dime, respectively^ of tho weight of i2i grams, grams, and grams, or precisely ohehalf, one-quarter, and one-tenth, respectively, of the weight of the French 5-franc piece. All of said coins were made a legal tender in nominal value for any amount not exceeding 55 in any one payment. The bill Was read in full in the Senate several times, and the record states on Januarys), 1872, that it was read in the House. It was undoubtedly read at other times. The bill was printed separately eleven times, and twice in reports made by the Deputy Comptroller of tho Currency, thirteen times in all, by order of Congress. it was considered at length by the Finance Committee of the Senate and the Coinage Committee of the House during five different sessions, and the debates upon the bill in tho Senate occupied sixty-six columns of the Globe and in the House seventy-eight columns of the Globe. ; The Secretary of the treasury called the special attention of Congress to tho bill in his annual reports for 1870,1871, and 1872. In his report of 1872 he says: ' "In the last ten years the commercial value of silver has depreciated about 3 per cent as compared with gold, and its use as a currency has been discontinued by Germany and by some other countries. The financial condition of the United States has prevented the use of sliver as currency for more than ten years, and I am of opinion that upon grounds of public policy no attempt should be made to introduce it, but that the coinage should be limited to commercial purposes, and designed exclusively for commercial uses with other naticfns. "The intrinsic value of a metallic currency should correspond to its commercial value, or metals should be used for the coinage of tokens redeemable by the Government at their nominal value. A3 the depreciation of silver is likely to continue, it is impossible to issue coin redeemable in gold without ultimate loss to tho Government; for when the difference becomes considerable the holders will present the silver for redemption and leave it in the hands of the Government to be disposed of subsequently at a loss. " Therefore, in renewing the recommendations heretofore made for the passage of the mint bill, I suggest such alterations as will prohibit the coinage of silver for circulation in this country, but that authority be given for the coinage of a silver dollar that shall be as valuable as the Mexican dollar, and to be furnished at its actual-cost.'* As a final answer to the charge that the bill was passed surreptitiously, I append, first, a copy of the section in reference to the Issue of silver coins as printed in the report of the Treasury Department and as passed by the Senate; second, a copy of the section as reported by Mr. Kelley; third, a copy of the section as reported by Mr. Hooper; fourth, a copy of the section as finally passed by the Senate and agreed upon by the conference committee. The following section was printed in the two reports of John Jay Knox, Deputy Comptroller of the Currency, to Congress; also in Senate bill 859, 303 67 Forty-first Congress, second session, April 28,1S70; in Senate bill 859, December 19,1870, and January 11,1871, third session Forjty-firsji Congress, as rep o r t e d b y M r . SHERMAN: ' " SEC. 15. And be it further enacted, That of tho silver coins the weight of the half-dollar, pr piece of 50 cents, shall be 192 grains; and that of the quarter-dollar and dime shall bo respectively, one-half and one-fifth of the weight of said half-dollars; that the silver coin issued in conformity with the above section sjiall be a legal tender in any one payment of debts for all gums less than $1." The following section was printed in Senate bill 85D, Forty-first Congress, third session, February 25, 1871, and House bill No. 5, Forty-second Congress, first session, March 9,1871, as reported by Mr. Kelley: •'SEC. 15. And be it f urther enacted, That of the silver coins the weight of the half-dollar, or piece of 50 cents, shall be 192 grains; and the quarter-dollar and dime shall be, respectively, one-half and one-fifth of the weight of said half-dollar; which coins shall be a legal tender at their denominational value for any amount not exceeding $5 in any one payment." The following section was printed ip House pill No. 2934, May 29, 1872; House bill No. 1427, February f?, 1872, and February 13,1872, Forty-second Congress, second session, as reported by Mr. Hooper: "SEC. 10. That the silver coips of the United States shall be a dollar, a half-dollar or fifty-cent piece, a quarter-dollar or twenty-five-cent piece, and a dime or ten-cent piece; and the weight of the dollar shall be 3S4 grains; the half-dollar, quarter dollar, and the dime sha}l be, respectively, one-half, one-quarter, and pne-tonth of the weight of said dollar; which coins shall be a legal tender, at their denominational value, for any amount not exceeding $5 in any one payment.'' The following section was printed in House bill No. 2934, December 16,1872, January 7,1873, and January 21,1873, Forty-second Congress, third session, a s r e p o r t e d b y M r . SHERMAN: "That the silver coins of the United States shall be a trade dollar, a halfdollar or fifty-cent piece, a quarter-dollar or twenty-five-cent piece, a dijne or ten-cent piece; and the weight of the trade dollar shall be 420grains tpoy; the weight of the half-dollar shall be 12} grains [grams]; tho quarter-dollar and the dime shall be, respectively, one-half and onp-fifth of the weight of said half-dollar; and said coins shall be<&legal tender at tjiieir noipinal value for any amount not exceeding $5 in any one payment." The following section was pontainedin all of the different bills and the coinage act of 1873: " SEO. 1 . And be it further enacted, That no coins, either of gold, silver, or 8L minor coinage, shall hereafter be issued from the Mint other than those.of the denominations, standard^, and weights herein set forth." Copies of the different bills may be obtained at the document room of the Senate. Statement showing the monthly receipts from customs qt New York since January, 1889, and the percentage of each bind of money received. [United States Treasurer's Report, 1892, page 50.] Months. J889. January February March 808 Total receipts. SI4,037,625 "12,954,640 13,422,511 Gold coin. United Gold Silver United Silver certifi- (certifi- States States coin. cates. cates. notes. Treasury notes. Per ct. Per ct. Perct. Per ct. Per ct. Perct. 10.6 83.0 6.2 0.1 0.1 9.4 85.1 5.3 0.1 0.1 9.2 87.5 3.1 0.1 0.1 68 Statement showing the monthly receipts from customs, etc.—Continued. Total receipts. Months. $11,962,153 11,096,791 10,697,716 13,791,000 13,324,514 12,015,653 12,201,906 11,175,885 10,997,977 April May June July August September October November December 1890. January February March April M ay June July August September October November December — 1891. January February March April May June July.August September October November December 1892. January February March April May June July August September October November. December ; - - 1893. January February— March April May June July Gold coin. United Gold Silver United States Silver certifi- certifi- States Treascoin. cates. cates. notes. ury notes. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. Per ct. 8.3 . . . . . . . . 2.7 88.8 0.1 0.1 5.9 81.5 12.3 . . . . . . . . 0.1 0.2 74.5 6.5 18.8 0.1 0.1 85.6 3.8 10.4 0.1 0.1 2.9 10.3 0.1 86.5 0.2 7.9 _ 2.1 0.1 89.7 0.2 2.0 7.3 0.1 90.5: 0.1 1.3 5.8 0.1 92.6 0.2 2.0 5.3 0.1 92.4 0.2 223,480 888,075 569,867 617,857 671,516 492,128 173,016 978,335 767,331 093,081 154,328 704,055 0.1 0.1 0.3 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.0 0.1 0.1 0. 1 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.1 0.1 92.5 95.0 95.7 95.4 93.6* 94.5 95.3 91.7 85.5 80.9 80.4 87.8 2.8 1.8 1.4 1.6 2.5 2.7 2.0 1.7 1.4 1.3 1.7 1.9 4.6 3.0 2.7 2.7 3.6 2.7 2.5 3.0 1.9 2.1 2.9 3.0 3.5 11.0 15.5 14.6 6.9 16,794,456 12,280,373 10,520,414 7,711,917 7,419,775 9,131,418 11,303,169 10,460,330 9,961,740 9,337,291 8,502,785 9,314,666 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.2 ftl 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 88.5 81.0 64.9 47.0 27.8 12.3 14.9 32.6 11.7 19.8 43.5 65.3 2.1 6.6 16.5 20.0 26.8 14.0 8.5 5.2 4.4 4.4 2.8 3.1 4.1 5.0 6.0 7.2 15.0 44.6 49.0 50.5 55.3 44.0 31.3 14.8. 5.2 ,7.3 12.4 25.6 30.2 28.9 27.4 31.5 28.4 31.6 22.3 16.7 11,960,445 11,628,815 10,871,923 8,879,912 8,103,436 9,591,270 12,295,908 13,175,485 11,335,347 10,341,120 9,951,385 10,570,853 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0,0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0. 66.1 25.8 18.7 14.9 9.9 8.0 13.8 12.1 3.6 6.6 7.8 4.4 4.3 9.3 5.7 6.9 13.0 15.9 15.5 10.4 10.9 6.4 6.3 9.2 15.0 36.2 42.5 46.4 40.6 26.8 28.4 25.6 45.8 51.9 52.8 46.4 14.5 28.6 33.0 31.6 36.4 49.1 42. 2 51.9 39.7 35.0 33.0 40.0 15,291,892 12,439,280 12,805,673 9,717,539 9,967,707 9,337,798 10,220,733 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 12.5 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 8.9 9.2 7.8 2.9 0.0 0.0 4.6 15.8 20.7 15.7 23.3 37.8 12.0 12.3 42.1 33.3 28.0 41.0 26.2 53.0 55.6 33.2 36.8 48.5 32.7 35.9 35.0 15.0 09 Statement showing amount of gold coin and bullion in the Treasury, and of gold certificates outstanding, from latest returns received at the end of each month. [United States Treasurer's Ileport, 1892, page 85.] Date. Total gold in Gold cer- Gold certifiTreasury, coin tificates in cates in and bullion. Treasury circulation. cash. $325,641, 856.12 326,456, 697.81 326,700, 938.96 328,203,900.80 321,297, 376.96 303,501, 319.58 300,759, 572.98 304,048, 189.30 305,871, 772.02 308,509, 615/21 310,979,791.06 313,818,941.47 $25,043,518 1130,986,592 24,802,813 130,210,717 26,586,125 128,826,517 20,783,433 136,614,789 27,350,140 129,044,662 37,235,793 116,792,759 34,669,943 118,541,409 39,557,233 123,393,519 42,073,803 116,675,349 34,925,823 120,937,229 30,668,090 123,483,119 31,316,100 122,985,889 316, 318, 320, 320, 321, 321, 316, 310, 454.19 752.14 794.87 411.60 253.10 423.49 823.28 120.43 471.18 603.03 879.85 214.20 20,452,870 28,222, £35 24,614,210 24,142,200 27,473,120 26,162,960 27,577,120 33,005,730 16,058,780 36,482,690 43,755,570 31,384,690 138,657,169 130,604,804 134,938,079 134,642.839 130,788,'399 131,380,019 132,444,749 124,382,539 158,104,739 138,173,979 131,316,499 144,047,279 1891. January „, February—March April May June July August September October November — December - 297,567,546.04 296,831,953.14 292,435,218.50 280,633,039.99 255.331.502.93 238,518,121.59 236,828,413.24 240,744,487.66 244.974.790.94 263,774,741.81 271,843,193.35 278,846,749.90 19,892,050 25,155,770 24,050,460 27,309,200 36,777,810 31,606,030 34,004,820 37,721,280 28,332,490 20,790,420 19,202,170 17,472,720 155,839,449 149,119,129 144,317,069 138,890,799 122,124,339 120,850,399 115,715,389 108,273,079 112,451,569 136,100,319 142,649,969 148,106,119 1892. January February March-— April May June July August September October November December 282,753, 863.24 282,123, 391.53 280,144, 1.34 273,623, 455.45 271,527, 0S1.86 255,577, 705.23 247,306, 220.66 242,543,695.63 240,605, 908.58 244,261,468.91 247,598,465.89 238,359,801.29 17,486,810 18,150,140 23,673,770 21,931,180 14,470,520 15,363,590 17,738,500 23.847,210 25,345,590 23,18!, 990 19,632,830 24,254,750 163,178,950 160,001,279 154,329,229 153,713,699 157,295,209 141,235,339 136,861,829 128,387,379 121,210,399 120,255,349 123,188,809 117,093,139 January February March... April May June July 228,827,532.53 15,729,770 217,672,947.91 7,782,260 218,378,232.99 5,135,430 202,283,359.08 8,888,310 196,518,609.76 3,324,670 188,455,432.59 1,071,170 93,710 186,813,962.98 120,645,819 114,388,729 111,488,009 105,272,029 101,469,969 92,970,019 87,611,029 January February.. March April May June -i July . August...... September.. October November.. December... 1890. January February March April May..— June July August September October November December 303 293, 293, 70 Product of gold and silver in the United Statesfrom 1792-1814, and annually since* [The estimate for 1792-1873 is by R. W. Raymond, Commissioner, and since by the Director of the Mint.] Years. Gold. April 2,1792-Jnly 81, 1834 July 31,1834—December 31,1844 1845 184 6 1847 1S48 1849 1850. 185 1 185 2 . 1853 1854...... 1855..—. .......... 1856 1857 . 1858 1859 1860 1861 1862 1883 1864 1865...—— 1866 - 18G7 1868... 1869.—. 1870 187 1 18721—— 1 8 7 3 . — — 1 8 7 4 . . — 1875 1876.—.-1877..,—...1878 1879— 1880 1881 .... — . — „ - — 1882 — 188 3 1884 1835 — — — — ... 1 8 8 6 . . - — „ - - . _ „ — — — — 1 8 8 7 — . _ „ — . . — — — 1888--— 1889... 189U_—..-.—— 1891,.---—.... ....— 1892— . — — — — — Total... 803 — Silver. $14,000,000 Insignificant. 7,500,000 5250,000 1,003,327 50,000 1,139,357 50,000 889,085 50,000 10,000,000 50,000 40,000,000 50,000 50,000,000 50,000 55,000,000 50,000 60,000,000 50,000 65,000,000 50,000 60,000,000 50,000 55,000,000 50,000 55,000,000 50,000 55,000,000 50,000 50,000,000 500,000 50,000,000 100,000 46,000,000 150,000 43,000,000 2,000,000 39,200,000 4,500,000 40,000,000 8,500,000 46,100,000 iij()oo,ooo 53,225,000 11*250,000 53,500,000 10,000,000 51,725,000 13,500,000 48,000,000 12,000,000 49,500,000 12,000,000 50,000,000 16,000,000 43,500,000 23,000,000 36, (foO, 000 28,750,000 36,000,000 35,750,000 33,500,000 57,300,000 33,400,000 31,700,000 39,9O0,000 38,800,000 46,900,000 39,800,000 51,200,000 45,200,000 38,900,000 40,800,000 36,000,000 39,200, C O O 34,700,000 43,000,000 32,500,000 46,800,000 30,000,000 46,200,000 30,800,000 48,800,000 31,800,000 51,600,000 35,000,000 51,000,000 33,000,000 53,350,000 33,175,000 59,195,000 32,800,000 64,646,000 32,845,000 70,464,000 33,175,000 75,417, C O O 33,000,000 73,697,000 1,937,881,769 1,146,869,600 Statement of the production of gold and silver in the world since the discovery of America. [From 1403 to 1885 is from table of averages for certain periods compiled by D^. Adolph Soetbeer. For the years 188G-1892 the produc\ tion is the annual estimate of the Bureau of the Mint.] Gold. Period. Annual average of period. Fino ounces. 1493-1520. 1521-1544. 1545-1500. 1561-1580. I581-1GOO. 1601-1G20. 1621-1640. 1641-1660. 1661-1080. 1681-1700. 1701-1720. 1721-1740. 1741-1760. 1761-1780. 1781-1800. 1801-1810. 1811-1820. 1821-1830. 1831-1840. 1811-1850. 1851-1855. 1856-1860. 1861-1865. 1866-1870. 1871-1875. 1876-1880. 1881-1885. 1886... 186,470 230,194 273,596 219,906 237,267 273,918 266,845 £81,955 297,709 34(5.035 412.163 613,422 791,-211 665, G66 571,918 571,563 367,957 457,014 652,231 1,760,502 6,410,321 6,483,262 5,919,582 6,270,086 5,501,014 5,543,110 4,794,755 6,127,750 Value. S3,855,000 4,759,000 5,656, C O O 4,546,000 4,905,000 5, G62,000 5 , 510,000 * 5,828,000 6,154,000 7,154,000 8,520,000 12,681,000 16,350,000 13,761,000 11,823,000 11,815,000 7, G O 000 O, 9,448,000 13,484,000 36,393,000 132,573,000 134,083,000 122,9S9,000 129,614,000 115,577,000 114,186,000 09,116,000 106,000,000 Percentage of production. Silver. Total for the period. Fino ounces. Value. 5,221,160 $107,931,000 5,524,656 114,205,000 4,377,544 90,492,000 4,398,120 90,917,000 4,745,340 98,005,000 5,478,360 113,248,000 5,336,900 110,324,000 5,639,110 116,571,000 5,954,180 123,084,000 6,921,895 343,088,000 8,243t 260 170,403,000 .12,208,440 £53,611,000 15,824,230 527,116,000 13,313,315 275,211,000 11,438,970 236,464,000 5,715,627 118,152,000 3,679,568 76,063,000 4,570,444 94,479,000 6,522,913 134,841,000 17,605,018 363,928,000 32,051,621 662,566,000 32,431,312 670,415,000 29,747,913 614,944,000 31,330,430 648,071,000 27,955,068 577,033,000 27,715,550 572,931,000 23,973,773 495,582,000 S, 127,750 106,000,000 Annua1, average of period. Fine ounces. 1,511,050 2,899,930 10,017,940 9,G2S, 925 13.467,635 13,596,235 12,654,240 11,770,545 10,834,550 10,992,085 11,482,540 13,863,1)80 17,140,012 20,985,591 28,261,779 28,746,922 17,385,755 14,807,004 19,175,867 25,090,342 28,488,597 29,095,428 35,401,972 43,051,583 63,817,014 78,775,602 92,003,044 9 3 , m 000 Total for the period. By weight. By value. Coinage value. SilGold. ver. Gold. Silver. Coinage value. Fine ounces. SI, 954,000 3,749,000 12,952,000 12,450,000 17,413,000 17,579,000 16,361,000 15,226,000 14,008,000 14,212,000 14,781,000 17,924,000 22,162,000 27,133,000 36,540,000 87,168,000 22,479,000 19,144,000 24,793,000 32,410,000 36,824,000 37,618,000 45,772,000 55,663,000 81,864,000 101,851,000 118,955,000 120,600,000 42,309,400 69,598,320 160,287,040 192,579, 500 209,352,700 271,924,700 253,084,800 235,530,900 216,691,000 219,841,700 228,650,8C0 277,261,600 342,812,235 419,711,820 565,235,580 287,469,225 173,857,555 148,070,040 191,758,675 250,903,422 142,442,986 145,477,142 177,009,862 215,237,914 316,585,069 393,878,000 460,019,722 $3,27(3,000 $54,703,000 89,986, C O O 207.210,000 248,900,000 318,251,000 351,579,000 327,221,000 304,525,000 280,166,000 284, 240,000 295,629,000 358,480,000 443,232,000 542,658,000 730,810,000 371,677,000 224,786 000 191,444,000 247,930,000 324,400,000 184,169,000 188,092,000 228,861,000 278,313,000 409,322,000 509,256,000 594,773,000 120,600,000 11.0 7.4 2.7 * o > 2.0 2.1 2.3 2.7 3.1 3.5 4.2 4.4 3.1 2.0 1.9 2.1 3.0 3.3 6.6 }8.4 l8.2 14.4 12.7 8.1 6.6 5.0 5.2 89.0 92.6 97.3 67.8 98.3 98.0 97.9 97.7 97.3 96.9 96.5 95.8 95.6 93.9 98.0 98.1 97.9 97.0 9G.7 93.4 81.6 81.8 85.6 87.3 91.9 93.4 95.0 94.8 66.4 55.9 30.4 26.7 22.0 24.4 25.2 27.7 30.5 33.5 36.6 41.4 42.5 33.7 24.4 24.1 25.3 33.0 3x2 52.9 78.3 78.1 72.9 70.0 58.6 53.0 45.5 46.8 33.6 44.1 69.6 73.3 78.0 75.6 74.8 72.3 69.5 60.5 63.4 53.6 57.5 66.3 75.6 75.9 74.7 67.0 64.8 47.1 21.7 21.9 27.1 30.0 41.4 47.0 54.5 53.2 M Statement of the production of gold and silver in the world since the discovery of Arnerica—Continued. [From 1493 to 1885 is from table of averages for certain periods compiled by Dr. Adolph Soetbeer. For the years 1886-1892 the product!6n is the annual estimate of the Bureau of the Mint.] Gold. Period. Annual average of period. Fine ounces. 1887 1888 1889 1890 1891 1892 Total- Value. 5t 093,984 $105,302,000 5,310,412 109,900,000 5,740,950 118,800,000 5,473,631 115,450,000 5,830,107 120,519,000 6,328,272 130,817,000 Percentage of production. Silver. Total for the period. Fine ounces. Value. 5,093,984 8105,302,000 5,316,412 109,900,000 5,746,950 118,800,000 5,473,631 113,150,000 5,830,107 120,519,000 6,328,272 130,817,000 397,191,823 8,204,303,000 Annual average of period. Fine ounces. Coinage value. 96,189,000 $124,366,000 109,911,000 142,107,000 125,830,000 162,690,000 133,213,000 172,235,000 144,426,000 186,733,000 152,062,000 196,605,000 Total for the period. By weight. By value. Coinage value. SilSilGold. ver. Gold. ver. Fine ounces. 96,189,000 $124,366,000 109,911,000 142,107,000 125,830,000 162,690,000 133,213,000 172,235,000 144,426,000 186,733,000 152,062,000 196,605,000 7,522,507,716 9,726,072,000 5.0 4.6 4.4 4.0 3.9 4.0 95.0 95.4 95.6 96.0 96.1 96.0 45.9 43.6 42.2 39> 39.2 40.0 54.1 56.4 57.8 60.3 GO. 8 60.0 5.0 95.0 45.8 54.2 Value of merchandise imported into and exported Jrom the United States f rom 1843 to 1892, inclusive; also excess of imports or of exports—specie value. [Compiled from United States Statistical Abstract, 1892.] Period—Year ending June 30. 1843, 0 months-1852 .. 1853-1802 1863-1872 1873-1882 1883 1884 1885 1886 1887 1888 188 9 189 0 1891 1892. Total Total excess of exports - Exports. Total exports. Imports. Total exports and imports. Domestic. Foreign. $1,258,331,652 2,373,822,537 2,861,812,207 6,509,165,121 801,223,632 724,964,852 726,682,946 665,964,529 703,022,923 683,862,104 730,282,609 845,293,828 872,270,283 1,015,732,011 $81,421,729 169,375,911 158,225,322 149,733,511 19^15,770 15,548,757 15,506,809 13,560,301 13,160,288 12,092,403 12,118,766 12,534,856 12,210,527 14,546,137 $1,339,753,381 2,543,198,448 3,020,037,529 8,658,899,032 823,839,402 740,513,609 742,189,755 679,524,830 . 716,183,211 695,954,507 742,401,375 857,828,684 884,480,810 1,030,278,148 51,380,127,002 2,905,205,742 3,986,821,828 5,572,700,559 723,180,914 667,697,693 577,527,329 635,436,136 692,319,768 723,957,114 745,131,652 789,310,409 844,916,196 827,402,462 $2,719,880,383 5,448,404,190 7,008,859,357 12,231,599,591 1,547,020,316 1,408,211,302 1,319,717,084 1,314,960,966 1,408,502,979 1,419,911,621 1,487,533,027 1,647,139,093 1,729,397,006 1,857,680,610 20,775,431,634 699,651,087 21,475,082,721 21,071,734,804 42,546,817,525 Excess of exports oyer imports. 1,086,198,473 100,658,488 72,815,916 164,662,426 44,088,694 23,863,443 68,5i 8,275* 39,564,614 202,875,686 1.803,246,015 403,347,917 Excess of Imports over exports. $40,373,621 362,007,294 960,784,299 28,002,607 2,730,277 1,399,898,098 Monetary systems and approximate stocks of money in the aggregate and per capita in the principal countries of the world. Countries. "United States "United Kingdom Prance Germany Belgium Italy_•. ..... Switzerland Greece Spain Portugal Austria-Hungary . Netherlands Scandinavian Union.. _ Russia.-.*, Turkey Australia..— Egypt Mexico Central America South America . ... Japan India China Tho Straits Canada Cuba, Haiti, etc Total. Ratio be- Ratio between tween Monetary sys- gold and gold and Populatem. full legal- limitedtion. tender sil- tender silver. ver. Gold and silver. 1 to 15.98 Gold Gold and silver T j o 151 Gold Gold and silver 1 to 15} ....do 1 to 15' do 1 to .„.do.. 1 to: „_.do. 1 to: Gold do Gold and silver 1 tolBl Gold _ Silver "HoiST Gold and silver Gold do Silver 1 to 16* ....do 1 to 151 ....do 1 to Gold and silver 1 torn 18 1 to 15 Silver ....do 1 to 14.95 1 to 14.28 1 to 14.38 1 to 13.957 1 to 14.38 1 to 14.38 1 to 14.33 1 to 14.33 1 to 14.38 1 to 14.08 1 to 13.69 1 to 15 1 to 14.88 i to 15 1 to 15.1 l to 14.28 1 to 15.68 Gold. ....do. 1 to 14.95 1 to 151 Stock of gold. 67,000,000 $604,000, 000 33,000,000 550,000, 000 39,000.000 800,000, 000 49,500,000 000,003, 000 6,100,000 G5,000,000 31,000,000 93,005, 000 3,000,000 15,000, 000 2, £00,000 2,000, 000 18,000,000 40,000, 000 5,000,000 40,000, 000 40,000,000 40,000, 000 4,500,000 25,000, 000 8,600,000 32,000, 000 113,000, 000 250,000, 000 33,000,000 50,000,000 4,000,000 ico, oeo, 000 7,030,000 100,000, 000 11,600,000 5,000, 000 8,000,000 35, 000, 000 45,000,000 40, O O 000 90,000,000 G, 255,0G0,000 400,000,000 4,500,000 2,000,000 16,000,000 20,000,000 3,582,605,000 Stock oi silver. Countries. United States United Kingdom Franco. Germany Belgium Italy Switzerland Greece Spain Portugal Austria-Hungary Netherlands Scandinavian Union., Russia Turkey Australia Egypt. Mexico Central America South America Japan India China. Tho StraitsCanada Cuba, Haiti, etc Monetary^ system. Full tender. Limited tender. Per capita. Total. Uncovered paper. Sil- PaGold. ver. per. 15 $21.34: Gold and silver 5538,000,000 $77; 000,000 $615,000,000 £412,000,000 $9.01 &U8 100,000,000 103,000,000 50,000,000 14.47 2.631 1.32 Gold Gold and silver 650,000,000 50,000,000 700,000,000 8i, 402,000 20.52 17.95 2.09 103,000,000 108,000,000 211,000,000 107,000,000 12.12 4.26 2.1Q Gold O, Gold and silver 43,400,000 6, C O 000 55,000,000 54,000,000 10.66 9.02 8.85 50,200,000 103,471,000 3.01 1.62 5.27 16,000,000 31,200,000 do 11,400,000 3,600,000 15,000,000 14,000,000 5.00 5.00 4.67 -do. O O 1,800,000 2,200, C O 4,000,000 14,000, C O .91 1.82 6.36 _do. 120,000,000 38,000,000 158,000,000 100,000,000 2.2! 8.78 5.56 ,.do. 10,000,000 10,000,000 45,000,000 8.00 2.00 9.00 Gold . 90,000,000 260,000,000 1.C0 2.25 6.5'J 90,000,000 do. Gold and silver 01,800,000 3,200,000 65,000,000 40,000,000 5.55 14.42 8.89 10,000,000 27,000,000 3.72 1.16 3.14 10,000,000 Gold .53 !, 000,000 38,000,000 60,000,000 500,000,000 2.21 1.36 4.42 Silver 1.52 45,000,000 45,000,000 G old and silver 7,000,000 25.00 1.75 7,000,000 Gold .. 14.29 2.14 15,000,000 15,000,000 50,000,000 2,000,000 .43 4.31 .17 50,000,000 Silver. .1' 500,000 .67 2,000,000 500,000 ....do 25,000, C O 600, O O 000 1.29 .71 17.14 O C, 25,000,000 do 50,000,000 56,000,000 2.25 1.25 1.40 Gold and silver 50,000,000 3.53 .11 900,000,000 28,000,000 000,000,000 Silver 1.75 700,000.000 700,000,000 do 100,000,000 100,000,000 5,000,000 40,000,000 3.56 1.11 8. 5,000,000 Gold . 2,000,000 40,000,000 10.00 1.00 20.00 800,000 1,200,000 ....do. Total TITEASUUY, DEPARTMENT BUBKAU OF THE MUST, August 3,489,100,000 553,600,000 4,0-12,700,000 2,635,873,000 16, $93.. 76 Coinage of nations of the world from 1792 to 1892. Countries. Years. Gold. 1793-1892 1816-1891 1795-1891 1792-1891 1832-1891 183G-1S91 1851-1891 1857-1891 1847-1891 1873-1891 1800-1891 $1,585, 302,060 1,160, 900,074 1,689, 785,518 79, 725,408 115, 538,019 3, 201,484 92, 9(35.850 623, 291FC83 31, 488,365 29, 613,957 965, 411,163 63, 429,611 65, 927,408 550, 418,328 11. 710,832 94, 439,473 192, 677,344 8, 185,138 316,000 1, 930,000 734,365 1882-1888 26,438,817 6,488,301 13,539,113 143,756,546 2,318,381 3,053,464 660,500 $611,358,811 151,925,944 1,025,314,200 1,733,298,368 103.128,149 6,910,027 113,250,035 277,769,824 189,719,348 11.673.564 234,^098,981 111,671,255 38,306,775 1,479,416 1,575,343,309 278,687,921 154,580,160 20,813,755 5,068,732 868,500 15,092,600 2,160,120 2,710,639 11.412.565 9,219,605 42,333,102 373,919 5,719,179 2,495,991 7,564,307,452 United States Great Britain France Mexico Belgium. Switzerland Italy Germany Netherlands Scandinavian Union Russia J Japan : Chile Australasia.. India Austria-Hungary Spain Portugal 5 Greece Servia Roumania Bulgaria Argentine Republic Brazil Egypt Turkey Central American States., Colombia Venezuela 6,736,784,794 1871-1891 1872-1888 1855-1891 1835-1891 1857^-1891 1876-1891 1854-1891 1867-1885 1882-1885 1879-1884 1883-1885 1849-1891 1830-1891 1844-1891 1829-1877 1868-1891 1874-1891 Total Silver. TREASURY DEPARTMENT, JBureau of the Mint, August is, 1893. Table showing the amount of metallic reserve, circulation, and uncovered notes of the principal European banks. Names of banks. Gold. $334,172,822 Bank of France.. 146,087,502 Bank of England Sixty-six English private banks Thirty-seven English j oint stock banks.... •15,579,769 Irish banks *2-lp 639,847 Scotch banks 163,504,667 Bank of Germany Other German banks.. •26,597.690 •21,179; 008 Belgium 15.638,064 Netherlands 36,£65,934 Bank of Spain Bank of Austria-Hun28,804,813 gary 39,815,900 Bank of Italy Other banks of Italy.. 36,129,600 Imperial bank of Rus190,954,897 sia •8,287,613 Ottoman Bank Bank of Roumania . . •15,573,363 2,354,600 Bank of Portugal NationalBank of Den•14,282,000 mark National B a n k o f •424,600 Greece 4,49(3,900 Bank of Sweden Other banks of Sweden 2,026, £00 •6,716,400 Bank of Norway 13,417,167 Swiss banks 1,659,800 Bank of Servia... 907,100 Bank of Bulgaria S03 Silver. Notes. 1893. $771,722,995 $188,283,177 June 29 124,432,974 June 28 4,379,329 5,889,668 31,639,219 32,895,097 81,751,573 234,857,290 45,538,920 79,003,761 34,932,210 75,133,893 24,940,812 161,825,724 4,379,329 May 27 26,059,450 32,895,097 10,399,aT0 18,941,230 57,824,753 14,765,619 99,918,978 May 27 May 20 May 20 June 24 June 22 July 2 June 25 June 25 80,667,104 193,745,098 84,273,181 June 22 21,527,413 116,014,616 54,671,303 May 10 31,271,404 104,895,500 36,494,496 May 10 696,661,411 4,818,438 25,306,546 9,733,183 4,207,400 53,383,800 46,821,800 20,207,100 984,300 2,605,500 3,683,598 791,300 135,100 May Feb. May May 27 28 8 24 5,925,100 Apr. 30 21,731,800 21,307,200 Apr. 30 10,827,300 5,346,100 Apr. 30 6,236,900 1,604,900 Apr. 30 14,629,400 7,913,000 Apr. 30 31,843,456 4,742,691 May 31 5,106,780 2,655,680 May 8 212,300 Mar. 14 •Includes silver. 77 Highest, lowest, and average price of silver bullion, and value of a fine ounce, bullion value of a United States silver dollar, and commercial ratio of silver to gold by fiscal years, 1874 to 1893. Highest. EquivaAverage lent value London of a fine Low- price per ounce with ounce exchange est. standard at par, .925. $4.8665. Pence. Pence. 57£ 59j 55| 58) 50 57; 501 58 55, 52] m 514 53L 51 52} pA m 50 45& 44* 49 Se| 48| 42 42 41f 4H5 42 43f 39 301 324 Pence., 58.312 56.875 52.750 54.812 52.562 50.812 52.218 51.937 51.812 51.023 50.791 49.843 47.038 44.843 43.675 42.499 44.196 47.714 42.737 38.375 33.060 Equivalent value of a fine ounce based on average price of exchange. 81.27826 1.25127 1.15184 1.20154 1.15222 1.11386 1.14436 1.13852 1.13623 1.11826 1.11339 1.09262 1.03112 .98301 ,95741 $1.28247 1.25022 1.15951 1.20191 1.15257 1.11616 1.14397 1.1350S 1.13817 1.11912 1.11529 1.09226 1.03295 .98148 .95617 .93510 1.04195 , .93648 .84123 .72471 1.04780 .93723 .84263 .72037 Bullion value of a ComUnited States sil- merver dollar, cial at average ratio of price of silver silver, ex- to gold. change at par. $0.98865 .96777 .89087 .92931 .89116 .86152 .88509 .8S057 .87880 .86490 .86115 .84507 .79750 .76029 .74008 .72055 .74932 .80588 .72130 .65063 .56052 TREASURY DEPARTMENT, Bureau of the Mint, August 1,1893. Value of silver coin and bullion imported into and exported from the TTnUed States from 1813 to 1892, inclusive; also excess of exports. [Compiled from United States Statistical Abstract, 1892.] Period—Year ending June 30. 1843; 9 months1852 1853-1862 1863-1872 1873-1882 ... 1883 1884 188 5 1886 1887 1892 r Total 808 Exports. Domestic. $62,832,863 400,451,426 188,187,965 186,073,265 12,702,272 14,931,431 21,634,551 19,158,051 17,005,036 20,635,420 25,284,662 22,378,557 14,033,714 16,765,067 Foreign. Total exports. $33,874,235 25,883,707 49,611,875 58,439,564 7,517,173 11,119,995 12,119,082 10,353,168 9,291,468 7,402,529 11,404,586 12,495,372 8,557,274 16,045,492 $96,707,098 426,355,133 237,799,840 244,512,829 20,219,445 26,051,426 33,753,633 29,511,219 26,296,504 28,037,949 36,689,248 34,873,929 22,590,988 32,810,559 Imports. Excess of exports. $30,253,698 42,707,040 60,754,850 113,503,974 10,755,242 14,594,945 16.550.626 17,850,307 17,260,191 15,403,669 18. G7Sf2l5 21.032. £'84 18,026,880 19,955,086 $66,453,400 333,628,093 177,044,990 131.008,855 9,464.203 11,456,481 17,203,006 11,660,912 9,036,313 12,634.280 18,011,033 13,840,945 4,564,108 12,855,478 1,022,074,280 274,115,520 1,296,189,830 417,327,708 878,162,092 78 Value of gold coin and bullion imported into and exported from the United States from 1813 to 1392: also excess of imports or exports. [Compiled from United State3 Statistical Abstract, 1892.] Exports. Total exports. Domestic. Foreign, 602,569 $25, 264,862 63, 4i2,45S 533, 997,089 156, 679,979 11, 787,753 41, 736,333 8, 186,125 42, 995,8S3 9, 816, J 50 18, 021,953 59, 870,859 423,103 86, 873,976 5P, £31,0-14, 498,26 i. 236,234; 8,9:20, 35,204, 2,741, 32,766, 5,705, 12,560, 54,930, 13,403, 81,933, 43,321, 1,060,126,391 164,699,090 Sports. 569te, 513! 86, C51| 98, 6J2 310, 888. 17, Excess of Excess of exports imports over OT;er imports. exports. $±31,752,003 $32,882,623 23,286,742 18,250,640 "22,208,842 850 10, 0 1 12, 65} 18, 327 49t 54,011,550 6,133,261 18,213, §04 33,20?,"414 .49,667, 127 '4,331,149 63,130,037 ' 495.873 1,221,825,f§l 820,261,931 597,836,027 193,275,477 401,560,550 •Report of domestic shipments commences with 1862. Commercial ratio of silver to gold for each yectr since 1637. [NOTE.—From 1687 to 1832 the ratios are taken from the tables of Dr. A. Soetbeer; from 1833 to 1878 from Fixley and Abell's tables; and from 1878 to 1892 from daily cablegrams from London to the Bureau of the Mint.] Ratio. Ratio. Year. 14.94 14.94 15.02 15.02 14.98 14.92 14.83 14.87 15.02 15.00 •15.20 15.07 14.94 14.81 15.07 15.52 15.17 15.22 15.11 10.27 15.44 15.41 15.31 15.22 15.29 15.31 15.24 171 4 171 5 1716,... 1717.... 1718.... 1719.... 1720 1721.... 1722 1723.... 1724.... 1725..-. 1726.... 1727.... 1728.... 1729.... 1730 173 1 1732....... 1733 1734— — 1735 , 1736——. 1737 1738....... 1739 1740-.—. 15.13 15. IT 15.09 15.13 15.11 15.09 15.04 15.05 15.17 15.20 15.11 15.11 15.15 15.24 15.11 14.92 14.81 14.94 15.09 15.18 15.39 15.41 15.18 15.02 14.91 14.91 14.94 Year. Ratio- 1741 1742....... 1713 1744—— 1745 14.92 14.85 14.35 14.87 14.98 15.13 15.26 15.11 14.80 14.55 14.39 14. H 14.54 14.48 1746....... 1747....... 1748....... 1749..;.... 175Q. 1751 . 1752.—— 1 7 5 3 — 17;>1—— . 1755 1756....... 1757....... 1758,...... 1759....... 1760 176 1 ... 176 2 .. 1763....... 1764 1765... . 1766....... 1767.. 14.63 14.94 14.87 14.85 14.15 14.14 14.54 15.27 14.99 14.70 14.83 14.80 14.85 Year, 1768.... 1769 1770.... 1771.... 1772.... 1773.... 1774.... 1775.... 1770.... 1777.... 1778.... 1779.... 1780—. 178 1 1782 178 3 1784.... 17S6.._. 1786.... 1787 1788..„ 1789....... 1790.... 1791.... 1792.... 1793.. „ 1794.... ftatio. 79 Commercial ratio of silver to gold for each year sines 1G87—Continued. Year. 1795. 1796. 1797. 1798. 1799. 15.55 15.63 15.41 15.59 35.74 15.68 15.46 15.26 15.41 15.41 15.79 15.52 35.43 10.08 15.96 15.77 15.53 1800. 3801. 1802. 1803. 1804. 1805. 1808. 1807. 1808. 1809. 1810, 1811. 1812. 16.11 16.25 15.04 15.26 15.28 15.11 15.35 15.33 1813. 1814. 1815. 1816. 1817. 1818. 1819. 1820.. 1821.. 1822.. 1823.. 1824.. 3825.. 1826.. 1827-. 1828.. 1829.. 1830.. 183L. 1832.. 1833.. 183*4. _ 1835.. 1836.. 1837.. 1838 „ 1839.. 3840.. 1841.. 1842,. 1843.. 1814.. 15.62 15.95 15.80 15.84 15.82 15.70 15.76 15.74 15.78 15.78 15.82 15.72 15.73 15.93 15.73 15.80 15.72 15.83 15.85 15.62 15.62 15.70 15.87 15.93 15.85 1845 3846 1847 3848 3849 i850 3853 3853 3854 3855 3856 3857....... 1858....... 1859 1860 1861 3862 3863 1864. 1865 18<S6.„ — 1867...-— 3868 3869 Ratio. 35.92 35.90 35.80 35.85 15.73 15.70 15.46 15.59 15.33 35.33 15.38 15.38 15.27 15.38 15.19 15.29 15.50 15.35 15.37 15.37 15.44 15.43 15.57 15.59 15. G O 1870.. 1871. 1872.. 1873.. 1874.. 1875.. 1876.. 1877.. 1878., 1879.. 1880.. 1881.. 1882.. 1833.. 1834., iS85_. 1886.. 1887., 1888.. 1889.. 1890.. 1891., 1892., 1893*, 15.57 15.57 15.63 15.92 16.17 16.59 17.88 17.22 17.94 18.40 18.05 18.16 18.19 18.64 18.57 19.41 20.78 21.13 21.99 22.09 19.75 20.92 23.72 28.52 *For seven months ending July 31, 1893. Wages andprice of silver bullion per ounce in the United States for ffty calendar years, 1841 to 1891. The average of wages from Report on Prices, Wages, and Transportation, Fifty-second Congress, second session, Senate Report 139, page 14; the price for silver bullion from International Monetary Conference, Treasury Department, October 12,18S2, page 42. The average wages paid are expressed by the index number 100 in the year 1860, and in gold. Average Price wages, of silver. Year. 1841 14 &2 1843 184 4 184 5 184 6 184 7 184 8 1819 185 0 185 1 185 2 185 3 1854 185 5 185 6 1857 Percent. 88.0 .... ..... 1808 185 9 87.1 86.0 86.5 86.8 89.3 90.8 91.4 92.5 92.7 90.4 90.8 91.8 95.8 ,98.0 99.2 99.9 98.5 99.1 100.0 186 0 186 1 1862 1863 1854 . . . . . 1865......... 1866 303 100.8' 100.4 76.2 80.8 66.2 108.8 $1,316 1.303 1.297 1.301 1.298 1.30 1.308 1.304 1.309 1.316 1.337 1.326 1.348 1.348 1.344 1.344 1.353 1.344 1.36 1.352 1.333 1.3!G 1.345 1.345 1.333 1.339 Year. 1867. 1868. 1869. 1870. 1871. 1872. 1873. 1874. 1875. 1876. 1877. 1878. 1879. 1550. 1551. 1832. 1833. 1884, 1S85. 1883. 3887. 18SS. 1889. 3890, 3891. Average Price wages. of silver. Percent. 137.1 $1,328 114.9 1.326 -119.5 1.325 133.7 1.328 1.326 147.8 1.322 152.2 148.3 1.298 145.0 1.278 140.8 1.246 135.2 1.150136.4 1.201 340.5 1.152 1.123 139.9 141.5 1.145 146.5 1.138 149.9 1.136 152.7 1.11 1.113 152.7 1.0645 150.7 .9946 150.9 .97823 153.7 .93897 155.4 156.7 .93512 1.04633 158.9 .98782 160.7 80 Table showing the amount, price paid, and present market value of silver bullion purchased under the laws of 1878 and 1890, stated separately; also the number of silver dollars coined since 1878 and their present bullion value. [Compiled by the Acting Director of the Mint.] Fine ounces. Purchased under act of 1878 Purchased under act of 1890 Cost. Total ... 291,272,019 160,157,168 $308,199,262 149,661,211 451,429,187 .......... 457,860,473 Value of same at market price for silver, August 12, at 75 cents per ounce J $338,585,890 Depreciation 119.274,583 Silver dollars coined 419.333,450 Worth at to-day's market price (75 cents per ounce) 243,245,581 Difference between coin and bullion value 176,086,866 The only countries in which the coinage of silver is free are Mexico and Japan, and one or two of the South American states, which have an irredeemable paper currency. BUREAU OF THB MINT, August is, 2663.