Full text of The Money Question of the 53rd Congress : Speech of Hon. David B. Hill of New York, Debate in the Senate, v.1, A-H

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

" W e hold to the use of both gold and silver as the standard money of the conntry, and to the coinage of both gold and silver, without discriminating against
either metal."—Democratic National Platform, 1892.
" "We believe in honest money, the gold and silver coinage of the Constitution,
and a circulating medium convertible into such money without loss."—Democratic National Platform, 1884.
" l a m a bimetallist. I do not believe in a single gold standard nor a single
silver standard, butrl do believe in the use of both gold and silver as the standard money of the country, and in their free coinage at our mints at a proper ratio,
without any discrimination in favor of one against the other."—David B. Bill.

SPEECH
OF

H O N D A V I D B. HILL,
O F

N E W

Y O R K ,

IN THE

SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES,
FRIDAY, AUGUST

25, 1893,

IN F A V O R O F T H E R E P E A L " O F T H E S H E R M A N
S I L V E R P U R C H A S E A C T , A N D IN F A V O R
OF F R E E BIMETALLIC COINAGE.




WASHINGTON.
1S93.




SPEECH
OF

H O N . D A V I D B. H I L L .
The Senate having tinder consideration the bill (S. 670) discontinuing the
purchase of sliver bullion-

Mr. H I L L said:
Mr. PRESIDENT: The President of the United States in his recent much-commended and much-criticised special message to
Congress took occasion to make a quotation from* some very
pertinent utterances of Daniel Webster made over fifty years ago.
Permit me at the outset of my remarks to-day to make another
quotation from the opening sentences of a famous speech of the
same distinguished statesman, delivered in this Chamber in the
year 1830, when he said as follows:
"When the mariner has been tossed lor many days in thick weather and on
an unknown sea he naturally avails himself of the first pause in the storm,
the earnest glance of the sun to take his latitude and ascertain how far the
elements have driven him from his true course. Let us imitate this prudence, and before we fioat further on the waves of this debate refer to the
point from which we departed, that we may at least be able to form some
conjecture where we now artf.

Imitating that course at this time, it seems desirable, after
two weeks of a discussion which has assumed the widest latitude and embraced almost every conceivable subject, no matter
how remotely related to the real controversy, that we should
now return to the consideration of the precise question involved,
from which we have been drifting.
Let us inquire what is the particular question to which our
attention has been invited, and for the determination of which
we have been convened in extraordinary session? As I understand it, the onljr subjeot legitimately presented is as to the advisability of continuing upon the statute books the provisions
of the Sherman silver-purchase law. A l l the questions which
have been so elaborately and eloquently discussed simply revolve around this one point, and are only collateral to it.
W h a t may properly be embraced in the realm of the debate of
such a concise and narrow question? Is it a wise, just, logical,
or necessary measure? Has it answered the beneficent purposes
for which it was ostensibly enacted? Has it fulfilled the expectations of its friends? Has it appreciated or depreciated the
currency endeavored to be created by it? Has it raised or decreased the price of silver? Has it benefited or injured the country? W h o are its defenders or apologists? W h a t do the people
desire in regard to it? W h a t would be the effect of its repeal?
These are pertinent inquiries to which our attention may be
m
3




4

appropriately directed, and are issues upon which debate may
well he confined. All other considerations are irrelevant to this
principal question believed to be involved.
Adopting- Webster's prudent suggestion, let us first recall the
peculiar circumstances under which we meet, and the important
character of the duty which surely confronts us at this hour.
The President of the United States, in the discharge of a public
duty, has summoned the official representatives of the people to
the capital in this midsummer month of August to meet an
exigency which has arisen in the financial affairs of the country.
Surely no trivial monetary disturbance, no slight financial
commotion, no ordinary cause was sufficient to justify the convening of the Congress of the United States in an extraordinary
session at such an undesirable period as this. A n emergency
was believed to have been presented which imperatively demanded that we should be called from our homes, and required
to assemble here to deliberate upon the condition of the country.
It was shown that our industries were paralyzed, that workingmen were out of employment, that prices were falling, that
stocks were depreciating, that money everywhere was being
withdrawn from banks and hoarded, that currency was scarce
and at a premium, and that confidence was largely impaired.
Sir, the picture was not overdrawn. A financial panic was
upon us and is still unabated—a panic longer in duration than
the one of 1873 and approaching in severity that of 1857. It is
destroying values, wrecking fortunes, and undermining prosperity. It is confined to no section of the country—it is universal. If legislation can relieve the situation, it should be applied
promptly and effectually.
It may be unwise to speculate as to the causes which have produced this condition of affairs, but remedies can not well be^provided without ascertaining as far as possible the true nature of
the difficulty.
President Cleveland has declared to Congress and to the country that the present unusual condition is to be attributed almost
wholly to the Sherman silver-purchase act of 1890, and candor
compels us to admit that this view is largely sustained by popular sentiment, which has adopted this conclusion either from an
intelligent conception of the vicious features of that act or because of a systematic attempt in some financial circles to impress
that view upon the country.
There are those who do not wholly agree with the President
in his diagnosis of the malady now affecting the body politic,
and who do not hastily join with him in the rosy conclusion th it
the financial millenium is to come the moment the Sherman bill
is removed. There are those who have given this subject much
reflection who are inclined to the opinion that the cause of the
present depression lies much deeper and beyond the Sherman
bill, and that its foundations were laid in the evil hours of 1873,
when the country unwittingly laid aside the financial policy
which had been its guide and safety from the foundation of the
Government.
The existing financial disturbance may be attributed to three
causes:
First. It is a natural or inevitable result or incident of many
164




5

years of real or fictitious prosperity. The nation is not unlike
an individual. The body -politic may appropriately be compared
with the physical body. A most careful observance of the rules
of health will not prevent sickness, and neither will a strict
compliance with the laws of business prevent commercial difficulties. Sickness is incident to humanity and commercial panics
are incident to trade.
Temperance, abstemiousness, dieting1, and rest may retard
human illness, but it comes to every man occasionally sooner or
later; while conservatism, absence of speculation, and observance of correct business principles on the part of the great majority of the business community will protract prosperity for a
while, but there will always be times of depression! The student of history knows that financial panics occur about every
twenty years, and our country has not been an exception to the
general rule. The panics of 1813, 1837, 1857, and 1873 should
have led us to anticipate one in about 1893.
In addition to these causes, which for the purpose of this argument I denominate " n a t u r a l " causes against which it is probable that no prudence could guard or prevent, there was much
reason to apprehend financial troubles at this time, owing to the
continued violation of correct business principles on the part of
our business men in their haste to become suddenly rich. The
spirit of gambling, the desire to indulge in illegitimate speculation, the attempt to secure wealth by any means save earning
it in the old-fashioned way, are fruitful causes of these times of
depression. The reaction—the retribution—has come, that is all.
W h y should we be surprised at the present lack of confidence
everywhere manifested?
Our financial centers have been flooded with watered stocks of
every description in which innocent people have been induced
to invest their means by the glittering promises of enormous
dividends which are not forthcoming. It has been the fad of
the times to organize corporations and issue bonds and stock
to an amount ten times the value of the property, and by such
questionable enterprises p .lupers have suddenly become millionaires. The country has been surfeited with such schemes,
whereby honest and confiding investors have been virtually defrauded, and confidence has thereby been impaired.
Candor compels me to say that these transactions have usually
originated with that class of financiers who infest our marts of
trade and are to-day ostentatiously attracting public attention
by their parrot-like clamor for an " honest" dollar, and against
the continued use of silver money.
Besides we are suffering from the evils of overproduction. W e
have raised more than we can profitably sell, and the markets of
the world have been closed to us owing to our restrictive tariff
laws. The balance of trade has unfortunately been against us.
W e have sold our railroad and other securities abroad instead
of at home, and the interest as well as portions of the principal
have been coming due and must be paid in gold, because it was so
" nominated in the bond," and hence our gold has naturally been
leaving us for foreign shores. If we contract enormous debts
abroad they must be paid abroad.
Unquestionably some of the present difficulty may be attrib164




6

uted to the uneasiness of our protected industries, which have
been accustomed to rely to a certain extent upon governmental
favoritism to support them, and whose proprietors naturally
apprehend that such favoritism may be withdrawn under a revision of the taxation laws contemplated by the party in power.
I do not disguise the fact that such uneasiness exists and that it
contributes its share to the general existing disturbance of financial affairs.
But there is no relief for this situation unless the dominant
party abandons its principles and surrenders in advance to the
interests which were defeated at the last election. The Democratic party is pledged to tariff reform, and it must redeem its
pledges, come what may. Of course it must be expected there
will be some friction. It is unavoidable. It is incident to the
anticipated withdrawal of public aid from private enterprises;
and it can not be prevented, but must be endured. The people
perfectly understood the question last fall, and they voted with
their eyes wide open. Our course is onward, and we shall not
retreat.
Second. Some portion of the present panic may be traced to a
concerted effort on the part of numerous monometallists to produce it, in order to further discredit silver as a part of the standard money of the country. That fact is apparent everywhere we
turn. W e observe it in their senseless arguments constantly
used against free bimetallic coinage and their ceaseless endeavors to confuse the present issue by characterizing it as a contest
between monometallism and bimetallism. They seemed to be
delighted when the first ray of financial trouble appeared. They
hailed the recent action of India with ill-concealed satisfaction.
They talked against silver, morning, noon, and night.
They denounced not simply the Sherman silver-purchase bill,
but the future use of silver as money. W i t h ghoulish glee they
welcomed every bank failure, especially in the silver States, little dreaming that such failures would soon occur at their own
doors. They encouraged the hoarding of money, they inaugurated the policy of refusing loans to the people even upon the best
of security; they circulated false petitions; passed absurd and
alarming resolutions, predicted the direst disaster, attacked the
credit of the Government, sought to exact a premium upon currency, and attempted in every way to spread distrust broadcast
throughout the land.
The best financial system in the world could not stand such
an organized and vicious attack upon it. These disturbers—
these promoters of the public peril—represent largely the creditor class, the men who desire to appreciate the gold dollar in
order to subserve their own selfish interests, men who revel in
hard times, men who drive harsh bargains with their fellow
men in periods of financial distress, and men wholly unfamiliar
with the true principles of monetary science.
It is not strange that the present panic has been induced, intensified, and protracted by reason of these malign influences.
Having contributed much to bring about the present exigency,
these men are now utterly unable to control it. They have
sown to the wind, and we are all now reaping the whirlwind together.
m




7

Third. But no matter what else may have contributed to the
present financial situation, it can not be denied that the Sherman
silver-purchase law has been at least in part and possibly the
most largely instrumental in producing the existing complications.
I do not propose at this moment to present any analysis of that
law. It is sufficient now to state that it has lost the popular confidence, that its operations have been unsatisfactory even to its
friends, that it has not increased the market price of silver bullion, that it has tended to discredit our silver currency, that it
has hoarded up a vast mass of unexportable and undesirable silver bullion in the Treasury of the United States either from the
natural effect of the law itself or from its mal or unfriendly administration, so that everywhere there exists an antagonism
towards it—a lack of faith in its wisdom and usefulness—a wellfounded conviction of its dangerous character and tendencies
which naturally makes capital timid, frightens business men,
and creates a real and genuine alarm, not a mere imaginary or
fictitious suspicion of insecurity.
The nature o l the act itself was alone sufficient to create uneasiness. It presented an ever-increasing danger; it was rushing the country towards a precipice which could not be evaded,
and it was only a question of time when its inevitable results
would bring disaster upon us. The recent action of India hastened it, while the other causes to which I have referred—some
natural and some manufactured—united in producing the present
extraordinary crisis.
But no matter what various causes alone or unitedly precipitated the existing emergency, it is sufficient for us to know that
the panic is here—it is upon us—it is steadily growing worse,
and it must be promptly met by the exhibition upon our part of
the most intelligent and exalted patriotism, a patriotism which
rises above partisan considerations, a patriotism which if need
be must sever party lines and ties, a patriotism which sinks
every selfish advantage and rises to a just conception of the
terrible importance of the occasion.
I am not'an alarmist and do not wish to exaggerate the pres
ent financial disturbance, but I fear that Senators do not keenly
realize the sad havoc which this crisis is making in the business
affairs of the country, and the end of which no man can foresee.
Neither am I one of those who believe that a simple repeal of the
Sherman law will at once restore abundant prosperity. It will
require many years to recover from the disastrous effects of tho
present disturbance. The greater the emergency, however, the
greater should be the effort to meet it.
OUR PLAIN DUTY.

It becomes our first duty in attempting to solve the present
financial problem to ascertain whether there is any existing
law upon the statute book which is indefensible and is either
wholly or in part responsible for our present unfortunate condition, and if we discover such a one it is our bounden duty to
promptly repeal it.
This obligation is so plain that it ought not to require any discussion to emphasize it.
164




8

That the Sherman silver-purchase law of 1890 constitutes such
an act admits of no doubt. No one now defends it. Few apologize for it. The political party that enacted it seems now the
most anxious for its repeal. That it has proved a disastrous
failure is scarcely denied by its present or former friends. It is
true that for some time after its enactment there existed a disposition among business men to acquiesce in its provisions as a
solution of the silver question, a n d l t is but fair to say that there
was manifested a qualified approval of it among men of both parties, especially among those who were opposed to free bimetalic
coinage and are known as monometallists.
That acquiescence and quasi approval proceeded from different
motives and opposite standpoints, the gold monometallists because
it had antagonized or prevented the free coinage of silver, and
hence they were gratified at its passage, and accepted it as a safe
measure, and extreme silver men, because it was some recognition of silver and promised to keep up its price. Both were
ultimately bound to be deceived by its specious promises, its false
hopes, and its dangerous possibilities. Both ought to be unanimous to-day for its repeal, but I regret to say that those who
voted against its passage seem now to be the most reluctant to
part with it. It was never defensible. It was a violation of
every correct principle of monetary science. I t was not even an
honorable compromise. It was a makeshift, a subterfuge, a mere
temporary expedient. The President in his message, not desiring at this time, for obvious reasons, to offend the sensibilities
of those who had voted for it, politely called it a " truce."
It has been asserted that the President himself, in his hostility to independent free-silver coinage, was disposed at one time
to regard with favor or acquiesce in the provisions of the Sherman law, which had been the instrument or means by which such
free coinage had been defeated. Whether this be so or not, the
fact remains and has not escaped observation that while the
Democratic national platform denounced the Sherman law and
demanded its repeal—denounced it, not as the result of a " truce,"
but as a ' 4 cowardly makeshift"^yet Mr. Cleveland, neither in his
speech delivered at Madison Square Garden, New Y o r k , in answer to the notification of his nomination, nor in his subsequent
letter of acceptance, nor in his inaugural address in March last,
criticised the Sherman law, nor made any allusion to it whatever, although it was then already threatening the prosperity
of the country with the dangerous results of its operation,
which were apparent to everyone who had given the subject
any careful attention.
The general disposition to approve or acquiesce in the Sherman law on the part of the monometallists in both parties was
further manifested by their tenderness toward it by their newspaper press, by their omission to denounce it, by their approval
of it in the platforms of various State conventions—notably that
of the Republican State platform of New York in 1891—and particularly by the majority report of the House Committee on Coinage, made up of members of both parties, and presented to Congress in February, 1891, wherein the Sherman law was virtually
approved and the necessity for any further or other legislation
denied.
164




9

448

On the other hand, true bimetallists—friends of a double
standard—bimetallists from principle and conviction and not
from mere selfish interests—never for a moment acquiesced in
the propriety of the Sherman law, but always regarded it as an
ill-devised scheme to retard the growing sentiment of the country in favor of free bimetallic coinage.
My own personal record is of the slightest consequence, but
the Senate will pardon me for alluding to the fact that my views
of the dangorous character of that act are not new, but have been
entertained and repeatedly expressed ever since its passage.
Within three months thereafter—on September 23, 3890—at
Brooklyn, then at Cooper Institute, New Y o r k , on October 8,
1891, at a meeting over which Mr. Cleveland presided, then at
Elmira on December 4, 1891, and twice soon thereafter in
Albany, I sought—in speeches which have been widely published—to arouse the people to the importance of a repeal of
that law.
It is useless to disguise the fact that at that time there existed
much apathy upon'the subject, other topics seeming- to engross
the public attention.. In fact, my own efforts were misconstrued,
and I t was insisted in some quarters that I was indifferent to the
sacred cause of '' tariff reform," and that 1 was seeking to divert
the people's attention away from that great issue in endeavoring
to arous them to the dangerous possibilities of the Sherman law.
Last December at the opening of Congress I promptly introduced a bill for the unconditional repeal of that law, and on February 6 last I had the honor of addressing the Senate kt length
in favor of its passage. I do not deem it necessary to reiterate
the arguments which were then presented. They are as pertinent to-day as they were then, although now it is likely that
they would fall upon more willing ears. It was our plain duty
then to have repealed that law; that duty is imperative now.
t h e sherman a c t is

indefensible.

The backbone of my argument against the Sherman bill may
be concisely stated in the following points:
First. The sure peril to all our industries in another greenback issue—for that is what the Sherman law amounts to—employing paper debt in place of gold and silver as a money-measure
of labor and the fruits of labor.
Second. Its sure hindrance of our return to free bimetallic
coinage, the sole legal tender of the Constitution, of our history
before the war, of monetary science, of the people's welfare—
silver and gold.
Third. That equivalence between the same silver, whether
solid in the coin or liquid in the crucible, can no otherwise be
maintained than just as equivalence is established between the
same gold whether coin at the mint or bullion from the meltingpot, to-wit, by the right, after melting, to have it transformed to
coin again—the right of free coinage, which includes recoinage.
Fourth. That parity (not equivalence), that local parity within the United States (not world-wide parity) of our silver dollars and our gold dollars depends (while free coinage is withheld from silver) upon the Treasury in its payments never disparaging the silver dollar by keeping back gold dollars, as if a
superior kind, when called for.




10

Fifth. That the Sherman law phrasing a concern to maintain
on a parity with each other " the two metals " was meant to prevent their parity, and, in fact,contrived a sure cumulative peril
to the local, legal, and minor parity of the 25.8 troy grains of
gold coined, and the 412.5 troy grains of silver coined, as a dollar, in the TJnited States.
Sixth. That the Sherman law organized an inflation of the
people's debt, a prevention of its payment with the silver purchased, such as the Allison law provided, and a contraction of
the people's gold. It may be further stated that the new greenback debt, also, was swollen to $150,000,000. There is one hundred and thirty-two millions less of gold in the people's Treasury, and a great depletion in their private stocks.
This law can not be defended, as it is based upon a wrong theory of finance. It does not provide for the free coinage of silver;
it provides only for a limited and restricted coinage of that metal.
It provides for the purchase of silver bullion: it treats silver as
a commodity. In one view of it the theory of the law seems to
have been that the compulsory purchases by the Government of
a vast quantity of silver bullion, amounting to 4,500,000 ounces
per month, would maintain the price of silver in the market, and
that the obligations of the Government to redeem its Treasury
notes issued in payment of silver bullion, in gold or silver, in the
discretion of the Secretary of the Treasury, would practically
maintain the parity of the two metals.
The law has proved a substantial failure for the accomplishment of thosfc ends. The price of silver has steadily fallen, and
the demand upop. our gold for the redemption of these Treasury
notes has weakened the Treasury to an alarming extent. The
Secretary of the Treasury has pursued the policy of using gold
instead of silver for such purposes of redemption, and fLecessarily
so, as he alleges; and hence our bullion, instead of being coined
and circulated as contemplated, has remained hoarded in the
Treasury vaults.
The Sherman bill has proved the worst enemy of the silver
cause, because it has retarded rather than aided the cause of
free coinage.
The Democracy of New Y o r k , in their State platform of 1891, *
hit the nail upon the head when they declared as follows:
We denounce the new Sherman silver law, under which one-tenth of our
gold stock has been exported and all our silver output is dammed up at home,
as a false pretense hut artful hindrance of return to free bimetallic coinage,
and as tending only to produce a change from one kind of monometallism to
another.

The Democracy of New Y o r k wanted that law repealed because it blocked the way to free bimetallic coinage, and not because it would aid the cause of monometallism.
That is exactly my position to-day. I am a bimetallist. I do
not believe in a single gold standard nor a single silver standard, but I do believe in the use of both gold and silver as the
standard money of the Country, and in their free coinage in our
mints at a proper ratio, without any discrimination in favor of
one against the other. And as such bimetallist, I favor the repeal of the Sherman law because it is undemocratic, illogical,
dangerous In its tendencies and results, an impediment to free
coinage, and a disgrace to the silver cause.
164




11

T h e Sherman law has used " t h e livery of heaven to serve the
devil in " long enough. It is called the Sherman silver law, and
thousands and tens of thousands of people—possibly a majority
of them—regard it as a free-silver law, or one equivalent to it.
T h e y point to the fact that many silver men are struggling to resist its repeal as though it was a vital measure to the silver cause,
when in fact it is the very opposite to free coinage.
T h e true friends of silver make a mistake, a serious mistake,
when they defend this law and allow it to be confounded with
free bimetallic coinage. Instead of it being called a silver law, it
should have been entitled " T h e Sherman bill to hinder free bimetallic coinage, to discredit silver, and to impoverish the
Treasury of the United States." That is precisely what it has
proved to be, and yet a simple repeal thereof is being vigorously
resisted as though such repeal would in some mysterious manner injure the cause of free coinage.
T h e Sherman law is objectionable because it directs the pur*
chase of silver, instead of providing for the free coinage of silver.
Purchase means price, price means commodity^ and the treatment of silver as a commodity means its derogation f r o m its intrinsic rank as a money metal. Gold has free coinage, and hence
it has no price in the United States. But silver has price. Silver purchases are simply a Government consent to prolong its
derogation. Such purchases can never promote their proposed
object, to wit, the preservation of a parity between the two
metals.
Gold is not purchased by the Government, and should not be.
It has the right of free coinage into full legal-tender money f o r
tho people, who bring it, to any amount. If melted, it has free
recoinage into the same amount of full legal money again, without loss.
Silver-coining nations have not purchased silver. T h e y coin
it for the people, just as gold-coining nations coin gold. T h e i r
silver if melted loses none of its value, for it is assured of recoinage into the same amount of full legal-tender money again without loss.
I t is the absence of the free coinage of silver—the existence of
a limited and restricted coinage, that compels Government purchases of silver, and such purchases absolutely prevent parity.
Even the maintenance of a semblance of parity drains the
Treasury of its gold, where silver is purchased. Free bimetallic
coinage is essential to the parity of the two metals, and nothing
else will successfully and satisfactorily maintain such parity.
T h e r e are certain elementary facts that can not be made top
plain.
T h e value of free coinage is that it virtually monetizes all the
metal wherever it may be.
Silver purchased, even if coined, monetizes no unpurchased
silver, and if not coined monetizes none at all. Free coinage of
silver is not the purchase of an ounce of silver. Nor is the free
coinage the purchase of any gold. T h e function of free coinage '
is to effect the monetization of all, but not by the purchase of
any.
T h e Sherman law proceeded upon a wrong and illogical theory,
and so d i d the Bland-Allison law. T h e y were both anomalous
164




12

and without precedent, and the true friends of a bimetallic currency should never have consented to the compromise which led
to their enactment.
Mr. BLAND, in 1878, should have insisted upon his original
bill, which was for the free coinage of silver, and either won or
lost upon that issue. But he was persuaded to accept a limited
coinage, and there has been difficulty, disparity, timidity, and
d inger ever since. The Sherman law perpetuated and exaggerated the same error.
The Sherman law should be repealed, and for the same reason
the Bland-Allison law should not be revived. Free bimetallic
coinage should be the goal for which we should now strive.
W H A T MIGHT H A V E BEEN.

My own conviction is unalterable that had the last Congress,
or the present Congress if convened in extra session on the 5th
of March, not delayed to repeal the Sherman law, the United
States would have largely escaped the panic long to be remembered as the monetary panic of 1893, and would have precluded
the closure of Indian mints to the free coinage of silver, which,
besides increasing panic here, scatter the seed of monetary
disorder over the whole earth, as Germany did twenty years ago.
As I have already stated, there is a remedy for our own immediate domestic difficulty—repeal, pure and simple; unconditional
repeal. The first remedy for poisoning our currency is to cut off
fresh doses of the poison.
But delay to appreciate the wider scope and foreign implications of our inaction has now let in, to block our path towards resumption of free bimetallic coinage, ahindrance greater than the
Sherman law itself.
Great Britain by stopping free silver coinage in India interposes perhaps greater hindrance to that resumption than the
act of France stopping free bimetallic coinage, in order to defeat Germany's campaign of substitution in 1873. For the free
coin-age of silver in India was always indispensable as a condition
to the free bimetallic coinage of France, and much more important, in the balance of the two groups of free monometallic coinage. than the free silver coinage of Germany.
As the free silver coinage of India was indispensable to the
free bimetallic coinage of France, by which independently and
alone she maintained the parity of gold and silver at the ratio
of 1 to 15i in all parts of both hemispheres; so free silver coinage in India seems indispensable (perhaps not absolutely so) to
free bimetallic coinage by the United States, independently and
alone, and to the perfect parity thereby everywhere of gold and
silver, either at the ratio of 15i or lti.
Free bimetallic coinage is not witchcraft. It is business.
And if not universal in all mints, but is to be accomplished by
the mint of a single groat metallic power, it implies the coexistence of each of the free monometallic coinages by other nations.
If even gold free coinage were to become isolated, confined to
one nation, free bimetallic coinage by that nation alone would
be impossible. If free silver coinage were isolated (confined to
ourselves, as it would almost be if adopted now), I fear that free bi161




13

metallic coinage would be impossible, even,to these great United
States. Especially would it be impracticable at the present
time and under existing condition^.
Independent free bimetallic coinage by the United States is
not consistent with the counsels of monetary science, if it is to
rest permanently upon an almost isolated free silver coinage.
Our return to free bimetallic coinage is therefore, now, for
the first time since 1873, subject possibly to the new hindrance
and prior condition of an adequate international agreement.
That is the legacy of the Sherman law, the joint legacy of the
Sherman law and the delay to repeal it. But let the dead past
bury its dead. And for our parts let us go forth to the future,
" without fear and with manly hearts."
These disasters which might have been averted in February
or March last, and these hindrances to a resumption of our sound
historic monetary system which were doubled in July, do but
prescribe to the public men of-our American Republic a larger
circumspection and a more unflinching purpose. W e can not
avert, Great Britain can not avert, the deep necessity of that
great resumption.
W e have a widened and more difficult task to achieve. W e
are driven perhaps to a change of plan. The goal of our great
endeavor is no less the prize of a high calling. International
free bimetallic coinage remains no less a capital interest of the
human race because its renewal may now have possibly passed
beyond the competency of a single government. It is no less
now than ever it has been, during the two decades of its vanished beneficence, the most far-reaching worldly interest of the
foremost nation of civilized men.
Perhaps, in the stress of our own domestic troubles from the
universal monetary disorder, we are liable to forget that longfamiliar aspects of the gold and silver question are become
obsolete, now that a cessation of free silver coinage has been
superadded to the twenty-year cessation of the free bimetallic
silver coinage.
Arguments for the simple, easy remedy so lately within our
reach are now an anachronism. Only a little while ago it was
possible, while free silver coinage was upheld in India, to commit to the newly chosen President of a great people, united in
this behalf, by voting to substitute for the Sherman law a free
bimetallic coinage law, the renewal of the general parity of gold
and silver, and then watchfully strengthening our* servants*
hands at every vicissitude of that endeavor.
To-day such a task, even if not rejected by an Executive veto,
would, I fear, strain and snap the most cordially united efforts of
Congress and the Executive.
THE PRESENT BIMETALLIC SITUATION.

Perhaps, indeed, I seem to give too much importance to these
varying phases in the present nonbimetallism, stopping free silver coinage in India, stopping compulsory silver purchases in
the United States. Compared with the stupendous unforeseen
stumble, just twenty years ago, out of bimetallism into nonbimetallism, trivial indeed are any passing phases of the universal nonbimetallism, whether local in Calcutta or local in
Washington.
448




14

The change from a fixed world-wide parity of crold and silver,
to their varying disparity, on the 6th of September, 1873,' by
the unwitting cessation of free bimetallic coinage, was an epoch
in history. These varying phases are but symptoms of that
disparity. The loss of the age-long parity of gold and silver I
believe to have been unwitting.
But I believe the resistance to its renewal is not quite so innocent. I fear it has arisen in the preference of a creditor kingdom and of creditor classes there and elsewhere for anew moneymeasure in place of the ancient universal bimetallic moneymeasure of mankind; for a new money-measure half as great, and
therefore twice as potent, in every purchase; for a mone^-measure exclusively of gold; for a new money-measure containing the
four thousand million dollars' worth of gold, but not the four
thousand million dollars' worth of silver (in round numbers),
comprised in the now dislocated bimetallic money-measure.
Such a substitution is chimerical, and it would be fraudulent.
To the great bimetallic money-measure the range and plane of
prices of all commodities had been for centuries conformed. After
twenty years' dislocation of the two moieties of the world's old
money-measure, the gold moiety and the silver moiety, a nonconformity of the range and plane of prices of commodities is far
from being established, for the disuse of either moiety is not yet
begun, and the abolition of either moiety is only dreamed of.
There were dreamers forty years ago who dreamed of abolishing
the gold moiety of the money-measure by cutting off gold from
a free bimetallic coinage.
The dream of abolishing one-half the money-measure rather
than reset the dislocated two halves explains the persistent opposition of Great Britain, a creditor kingdom, controlled by creditor classes, to the renewal of free bimetallic coinage—the cause
and condition of their permanence in parity. It explains why
Great Britain has defeated every monetary conference assembled
by France and the United States to that end. It explains the
British ukase, for which no British statesman dare stand open
sponsor or publish his forecast of its results.
To put either money metal out of the category of money into the
category of commodity constrains them to disparity much as if
both were commodities; and until their parity is renewed the
consequences of disparity can but go on quite remediless.
Repeal of the Sherman law making a commodity of silver by
purchases can not, therefore, produce the beneficent results of
restoring the parity of gold with silver in full monetary use
through a free bimetallic coinage. But meanwhile repeal will
facilitate their local parity. Gold monometallists everywhere
have hailed the British ukase closing the mints of Calcutta and
Bombay as " the doom of silver." The American branch of believers hoot at the 44 pernicious pig metal" and dream the coming consummation of their hope.
On the contrary, it brings that new-fangled monetary theory—
the theory of gold monometallism, begotten in the embraces of
ignorance with rapacity—at last to an unequivocal and crucial
test.
For the moment, for the day, for the year, it seems to finish
the disparagement of silver, commenced with the cessation of
m




15

its share in a free bimetallic coinage, continued by its withdrawal f r o m a monometallic free coinage, while Cinderella's sister alone frequents the mints of all the great metallic powers.
But many years ago, the editor of an able newspaper, the N e w
Y o r k Evening Post, who was also a great American poet (I refer
to Mr. Bryant), summed up in four immortal lines the inevitable outcome of enthroning successful Error above underfoot and
downtrodden Truth:
Truth crushed to earth shall rise again—
The eternal years of God are hers;
But Error, wounded, writhes with pain,
And dies among her worshipers.

T h e incurable wound of this error was inflicted by the worshipers of gold monometallism in England when it was pushed
forward, by a necessary logic, to one more step in the disparagement of half the money of mankind—the withdrawal of free
coinage f r o m silver in a great Empire where silver was and is
and must ever be the sole possible coin of universal employ and
full legal tender.
THE BRITISH EDICT IN INDIA.

W h a t was the modus operandi f A sudden edict, from their
British conquerors on the other side of the globe, stripping off
from their only money metal the primary condition of its equivalence, whether circulating as coin o r hoarded in bangles. Sir
David Barbour, that Indian finance minister and bimetallist
w h o begged f o r free bimetallic coinage as the scientific solution
of India's monetary troubles and the world : s monetary troubles,
testified that the silver hoards of India were correctly computed
at £130,000,000 sterling worth. Free coinage had ever maintained the equivalence of silver in the ornamental bangle with
silver in the coin rupee.
T h e British ukase stripped these Indian savings and ornaments of nearly half their purchasing power, subjected them to
varying disparity like the disparity between the silver dollar
and 412£ troy grains of silver bullion, and asserted for the British conquerors of 250,000,000 people power to make for them and
coin silver purchases, and denied their immemorial r i g h t to tho
free coinage and recoinage of silver. Such is the lot of the E n g lishman's " dumb-driven cattle." W h a t was the ostensible
scheme? It was the endeavor to put a p e g in at the present
limit of disparity between silver and gold, a disparity caused
and continued by stopping the ancient access of silver to free
coinage at the mints of Europe, where the alternative adoption
of gold was not a physical impossibility.
T h e public confessions of the gold monometallists—the plain
implications of their scheme—are more instructive than even its
present failure. T h e scheme is an open avowal that disparity
between silver and gold, that divergence f r o m a bimetallic par,
is intolerable. T h e scheme is an open avowal that in any state
of disparity present, the liability to greater divergence f r o m
parity, and the liability to less divergence f r o m parity, are two
evils-which threaten commerce with costs and disaster. T h e
scheme was published and recommended as an endeavor to stop
the first liability. Instead of dwelling on its demerits or present failure, I prefer to note the implied admission of the supreme
valiie of a fixed parity of gold and silver.
164




16

Another implication is that the most hidebound British gold
monometallists can not avoid retaining the use of silver coin as
money of full legal tender in the domestic trade and, foreign
commerce of subject populations whose mere increase during
the last decade vastly outnumbers the total population of the
United Kingdom on all its islands.
Abolition of silver as money of full legal tender, announced by
the New Y o r k Evening Post^as to-morrow's millennium, is not
attempted yet by any sort of fools among British statesmen.
Abolition of India's sole possible coin money of full legal tender being impossible, the subordination oi silver there to gold
elsewhere in the British Empire is the exact description of this
avowed experiment. Parity is discarded; disparity is vainly limited; subordination is attempted. For subordination, if achieved,
and a renewal of parity by other powers prevented, involves
usurping for gold alone the function of the standard; that is to
say, the function of the ancient bimetallic money-measure.
Written all over the face of this theory and this endeavor is che
rapacious purpose to make the sufferings entailed by the loss of
that parity which Great Britain is preventing, work out at last
the halving of the old bimetallic money-measure of mankind and
the doubling of the purchasing power of a ne w gold money-measure upon all the wages of labor, all the fruits of labor, all the
debts of labor, for the benefit of the creditor classes of a creditor
state.
Subsidiary and subordinate coinage of silver for small change
is easy enough in Great Britain, which produces neither money
metal and has enough of gold. But the attempt to make subsidiary and subordinate to gold the coinage of silver among the
vastly outnumbering populations of mankind, who have no other
money metal of full legal tender except silver, and whose mere
numbers make their sufficient share, and their necessary divisions of gold as a money metal commercially impracticable and
physically impossible, is rapacity foredoomed to defeat, it derives from cockney convenience a rule for crowded empires possessing of the two money metals but one, with no reason for its
subordination to another, and without gold for it to be subsidiary
to, but being subject themselves to the common need of all commercial nations, a single common money metal or a fixed parity
between their respective or common money metals, if there are
two—the parity of past ages, the international currency of silver
equally with gold,
I have noted to the Senate the implied admissions of this
precious scheme. I have mentioned its homage to the discarded
rule and result of free bimetallic coinage, the parity of gold and
silver, in its legalizing and untried method and sort of parity, a
bureaucratic maximum limit of disparity.
If any Senator would fain believe that something else than deliberate rapacity inspires the present rulers of Great Britain in
their long defeat of the efforts of the two great Republics,
France and the United States, for renewal of the parity of gold
and silver, and in this latest preventive measure, I will assist
his aspirations by some evidence that their Anglo-Indian ukase
may rather be deemed mere ornamental imbecility.
These British statesmen, like their royal George, so anxious
m




17

for their own good and " the goods of all the psoples " of their
empire, have commenced their campaign by creating the most
stupendous mass of inconvertible money—money inconvertible
with the new unit of value—ever known in the history of the
human race. Nobody can deny that'fact. I can put in evidence
Sir David Barbour's statementof it, a man of science and affairs.
I do not cite the British chancellor of the exchequer, Sir W i l liam Harcourt. He is a burlev bruiser who knows as much
about coinage and currencies as John Sullivan. He told a deputation comprising delegates from the London Chamber of Commerce on the 25th of January this tale of the double florin, a
silver piece in the mere subsidiary coinage of Great Britain:
" T h e double florin is so unpopular that I believe it has gone
abroad."
He told the " c i t y " men of London that, and nobody laughed.
That will do for Sir William Harcourt and the " city " opinion
of London. He conceives that a subsidiary coin can have extranational export or international currency; and it is this finance
minister who directs the subordination of the silver rupees of
India to the gold sovereign of Tower Hill.
I would myself accept the idea that the Anglo-Indim ukase is
merely monumental British stupidity, if it were the first act in
the monetary drama instead of the fourth.
Great Britain defeated the renewal of the parity of gold and
silver at the monetary conference of 1S78.
Great Britain defeated the renewal of the parity of gold and
silver at the monetary conference of 1881.
Great Britain defeated the renewal of the parity of gold and
silver at the Brussels monetary conference of 1892.
Great Britain now, in 1893, is combining her Asian with her
European power to prevent renewal of the parity of gold and
silver by the United States and France or other foreign powers
at any mtu; e time. To create the hugest mass of inconvertible
money ever known, while posing as monetary purists, may look
like pious imbecility worthy of a Pharisee in Bedlam. But on
review of the successive acts of the monetary drama, a states-,
man of sense will " d o u b t not through the stages an increasing
purpose runs."
I admit, for I affirm, that the British new-fangled theory of
gold monometallism is an ignorant, insular, weak minded theory, like their theory of taxation without representation before
1776, like their theory of impressments for the British navy in
American ships before 1812, like . their theory of irresponsible
naval intervention to assist the disunion of these States before
the Alabama arbitration of 1871.
But it is no disproof of a selfish rapacity that its methods may
foredoom their own frustration. And what, indeed, has the
greedy purpose of these insular theorists so far brought to pass?
Have they demonetized silver? Strictly speaking, silver has
not been demonetized. The usual phrase is at fault. It is the
indignant utterance of impoverished men and injured nations,
but not the accurate language of monetary science.
Until now not announce of silver has been demonetized. Coinage has been stopped here and there, but the old silver francs,
thalers, florins, dollars,'rupees, are still in existence and mone164—%




18

tary use. Some German thalers, florins, the Roumanian and
Scandinavian silver pieces, hava been transformed into francs or
rupees. Silver has not been demonetized. So much silver was
never in monetary use as now.
Silver in that sense has .not been demonetized, and the total
achievement of the rapacious and ignorant theorists of gold
monometallism thus far has been to polder, to confine within
the several boundary lines of all nations —as if they were the
dikes of so many sunken t nks—one-hal£ the full legal-tender coin
money of the world by despoiling silver of its old international
monetary power. In place of the old world-wide parity of silver
and gold, there is gold in a few and silver in all nations, and no
parity for twenty years betw en them or any, and as many local
parities as there are nations formerly bimetallic.
To have despoiled silver of monetary power internationally;
to have suppressed parity b tween onemoaey metal of the North
Atlantic States and th.3 money metal of the great mass of mankind—that is the sum-total of results achieved. That is the title
of Great Britain to curse her dependent state with the curse of
an inconvertible mon iy and boist the " P a x Brittanica."
If there is any honest m m among British statesmen who has
favored the successive procedures of Great Britain in this latest
procedure because he knew no better, he has one lesson to learn.
There is no reason undar heaven to expect renewal of the
stable, unvarying parity, the universal, age-long parity, of gold
and silver prior to September, 1873, from any other source, by
any other means, than the renewal of its cause—competent free
bimetallic coinage.
There is no reason under heaven to suppose the totally unprecedented shocks and fluctuations of divergence and disparity
between gold and silver, continuous now for' exactly twenty
years, will ever discontinue, so long as eith r money metal is not
by competent free bimetallic coinage tr e l a t e d back again out
of the common chances and conditions of a commodity.
Meanwhile the local legal parity of our silver dollars with the
gold dollar of 25.8 troy grains should be maintained at all hazards and under all circumstances, and the silver purchases
stopped and isolated free silver coinige rejected for the present,
in order to avert the present and future dingers to that local
legal parity of the silver in the silver dollar and the gold in the
gold dollar; but especially and also in order not to avert and in
order not to prevent the renewal of the greater parity, the parity
of all gold and all silver at one fixed ratio around the world, by
means of a competent free bimet illic coinage.
My point is not now that our isolated free coinage of silver
under present conditions will entail an exclusive silver basis
here. My point is that we should not confirm Great Britain in
her delusion of a gold basis everywhere by thus increasing
European gold stocks with our gold stock; we should not deprive the United States of all power to promote free bimetallic
coinage; we should not put off the hope of monetary peace into
the next century.
The local parity of the silver dollar and the gold dollar in allthese United States is our point of honor. It behooves us to be
intolerant of present danger from the Sherman law, intolerant
164




19

of the future danger which Great Britain has created for us in
absolutely isolated free silver coinage at the present time.
To attain the renewal of free silver coinage along with freegold coinage it behooves the United States to reverse their present policy, to augment Great Britain's difficulties and diminish
our own, to stop temporarily the increase of silver in our currency under existing conditions and increase its gold constituent.
Both are feasible. I hope to address the Senate further upon
this point at some future time. I will not dwell upon it now.
Repeal of the Sherman law, h?d it taken place when, almost
alone and unsupported, three months after its en ictment, 1 began the systematic advocacy of its repeal, would have ent died
long ere this, as I believe, free bimetallic coinage in Europe
and America.
It will hasten now that day of deliverance; for it will release
from an invidious position all those in tiie great West who are
accused v of a dishonest intent of inflation and enable them to
fight for the first time with full powers for restoring . free bimetallic coinage of the best money in the world—the sole money
incapable of inflation.
THB PERMANENT REMEDY.

It will be observed from what has already been stated that
the permanent remedy for our financial difficulties is a return to
the bimetallism which existed prior to 1873. Nothing else will
do it. W e have tried everything but the right thing. It has
been stated over and over again during the present debate,' especially in the other House, that the country has tried the experiment of silver coinage and that it has proved a failure, >*nd
that therefore we should now return to a gold standard.
The country has not tried free coinage since it was unwittingly abandoned in 1873, but it has tried a limited and restricted
coinage, silver purchases, the accumulation of silver bullion,
and a depreciated currency, all of which have been forced upon
the country by monometallists through miserable compromises
obtained from silver men.
W h y not try the only remedy that has not yet been applied?
W h y keep the Sherman law intact or why indulge in other experiments, equally delusive, equally illogical, and equally unsatisfactory? The fact should not be forgotten and can not be too
strongly impressed upon the public mind that at the very time
silver was demonetized in 1873 it was upon a par with gold,
That was when we had free bimetallic coinage in this country—
not a gold standard nor a silver standard, but both gold and silver
x
were the standard money.
If pledges in platforms amount to anything, unless they are to
be regarded as mere set phrases with which to catch votes and
not to be fulfilled, then both the great political parties are solemnly pledged to a return to that bimetallic systsm which existed prior to 1873. There may be permitted differences as to
ratios, as to minor details, as to methods of procedure, and as to
the precise opportune time for a return; but the important fact
remains that'all the political parties a^e irrevocably committed
to the general policy of bimetallism, which, if pledges are kep£,
must sooner or later be permanently established.
161




20

The Senator who asserts that he is in favor of a single gold
standard for the money of the country can not belong to either
of the great parties. He must be a no-party man, a free-thinker,
a go-as-you-please politician, of which there are types in Congress, in Cabinets, and everywhere. Such a Senator certainly
has no right to speak for the Democratic party.
Bimetallism does not mean the stoppage of further silver
coinage, while maintaining our present silver currency intact,
but it means the free coinage of silver and gold by the Governmentj either under an international agreement or independently.
The stoppage of further silver coinage, but the maintenance of
existing silver currency accompanied by the free coinage of gold,
is not bimetallism, but it is what the famous French financier,
Mr. Cernuschi, called "humped-back monometallism," such as
exists in France and Germany to-day.
This is not what our country needs for permanent relief, but
we want the establishment of a perfect system of free bimetallic
coinage as it existed prior to 1873, whereby every silver dollar
may be kept at a parity with every gold dollar. That result was
accomplished then—it can be accomplished again.
X am opposed to a single standard of gold because there is not
gold enough in the world to fulfill the needs of a sole money
metal. I believe I hazard nothing in that statement, but only
express the profound conviction of the thoughtful people of the
United States, and of the people of every other country in the
whole civilized world except the ruling powers of Great Britain.
Their course is determined by what they regard as their own
selfish home interests, regardless even of the best interests of
their colonies.
The business of the United States as well as the business of
the world is rapidly augmenting. Ours is comparatively a new
country; yet our population is already larger than the mother
couatry, larger than either Great Britain, France, or Germany;
our resources are being surprisingly developed, our commerce is
increasing, our industries are desirious of extension, the wonderful inventions of our citizens are demanding additional capital,
the spirit of progress is abroad, we insist upon more of the
costly comforts, conveniences, and luxuries of life than were permitted to our fathers before us; new and growing States are
knocking for admission into our Union, and the star of empire is
rapidly making its way westward; new and gigantic enterprises
of every conceivable description are crowding to the front, and
the evidences of a higher, better, grander, and more magnificent
civilization are accumulating. W e are no longer a weak, puny,
contracted, and poverty stricken people, but soon will be by far
the wealthiest nation on the globe.
j The observance of these gratifying evidences of national progress, gratifying as they are to the patriotic citizen, naturally
lead to the suggestion that such a country and such a people
should not, in their onward march of improvement, be cramped,
hampered, embarrassed, and restricted on account of any insufficiency in the currency. Money is but a measure of value and
a medium for facilitating exchanges. Its volume should be sufficient to adequately represent the aggregate wealth of the
world. The value of money—the standard—is fixed by govern164




21

ments in statutes. As one of the financial writers of the world
says, " W i t h o u t law there is no legal tender, without legal tender there is no money."
This great and growing country of ours needs a much larger
circulation per capita than any other country in the world. It
will not answer to compare the needs of our nation in this regard
with the old, unprogressive, finished nations of Europe, where
the wealth is largely controlled by a few families.
The insufficiency of our present volume of currency seems to
be everywhere conceded, and yet there is an unaccountable reluctance to establish a permanent financial system under which
that deficiency can be easily supplied.
The proposition now before Congress to allow the national
banks to increase their circulation 10 per cent—and which proposition I earnestly favor—is the outcome of a general desire lor
an increase of the currency, the insufficiency of which has been
made plainly manifest during the present crisis.
To that proposition of itself there is little objection, yet it is
a strange spectacle which is presented when we witness that
those who are the most clamorous for such increase at the present juncture are usually holding up their hands in holy horror
and solemnly protesting against any other increase of the currency—especially an increase of silver money—as "inflation,"
when in truth both silver and gold are money metals absolutely
incapable of inflation.
The speech of a distinguished gold monometallist in the
House the other day abounded in references to our "redundant
currency;" to the " abundance of .money" with which the country is blessed; to the "ample suppiy"of the circulating medium,
and other expressions indicative of the opinion that the country was .already surfeited, or at least too well supplied, with circulation.
I do not believe it. The country does not believe it. The
business men of our land believe i t ' t o be untrue. If one fact
more than another has been adequately demonstrated in the
present emergency, it is the fact that we need more circulation
with which to do business. Let us give our national banks the
relief which they ask, and then prepare the way for a stea,dy,
permanent, and safe increase of silver circulation—silver which
shall be at a parity with gold; silver which shall be able to buy
as much as gold; silver which shall be coined and circulated,
and not hoarded up; silver for which the plain people are clamoring—the silver which was mentioned in the Democratic national
platform of 1884, when it declared that 41 W e believe in honest
money, the gold and silver coinage of the Constitution, and a
circulating medium convertible into such money without loss."
In the year 1892 the total production of gold in the United
States was only $33,000,000, not as much as in 1891. The production has remained about the same for several years, with no
material increase, notwithstanding the increase of our population and resources. In 1878 it was $51,200,000, being $18,200,000
more than last year. For many years the average annual production was over $55,000,000, while now such average is scarcely
$33,000,000.
It is true that outside of the United States there has been
164




22

some Increase in the world's production of gold during recent
years, but an average annual increasa of only $10,000,000, which
is about the figure, is comparatively insignificant when the increased population and requiremBnts of the whole world are
taken into consideration. How much gold bullion is lost, hoarded,
used in the arts, and otherwise disposed of and not applied to
currency purposes? An annual incraass of production of $30,000,000 would not keep pace with the world's needs, especially
if, as is positively proclaimed here and elsewhere, a gold basis
is to be finally established by all the governments of tha world.
In that event what a contemptible figure the slight annual increase of ten millions would cut in the effort to answer the
world's demands. It must be borne in mind that in the event of
a universal gold basis, a failure in the requisite gold supply
means absolute ruin, a stationery production means hard times,
a diminution in production me ins bankruptcy of tens cf thousands; in fact, it may be positively asserted that anything less
than a reasonable and liberal increase in the annual gold production would mean stagnation of business, financial disturbance, and a renewal of our present difficulties. The world needs
all its silver as well as its gold to give us an automatic and
elastic currency.
W e need not bs disturbad about the increase in the production of silver. It cuts no figure in the solution of the great monetary problem. The annual increase is not 1 per cent of the
world's total supply. Every ounce of silver extant on the earth
now—the total accumulation—if carried to the Acropolis at
Athens and melted in one block would not half fill the famous
Parthenon.
W h e n the gold mines of California were discovered, in 1849, Europe became frightened and complained loudly of a fear of being
deluged with American gold; but the fear was soon shown to be
groundless, and that gold proved to be a blessing to a povertystricken world. History will repeat itself in our American history of to-day, and silver will perform the sam3 beneficent purpose that gold did then. It is for the interest of the United
States to insist upon silver being a part of, our standard money,
for we are the great silver-producing country of the world.
It is unnecessary to characterize the demonetization of silver
in 1873, or to inquire whether it was done intentionally or ignorantly. Secretary Carlisle, at a time when he reflected his own
sentiments, and was not merely the mouthpiece or subordinate
of others, characterized the act as a " gigantic crime " against
the people.
James G. Blaine in speaking of the same subject said, " I f ,
therefore, silver has been demonetized, I am in favor of remonetizing it. If its coinage has been prohibited, I am in favor of
having it renewed. If it has been restricted, I am in favor of
having it enlarged."
THE QUESTION OP RATIOS,

I do not propose to discuss to any extent the matter of ratios,
because I do not regard that the time has arrived for its serious consideration. When the policy of bimetallism shall have
been definitely settled, then the opportunity will be ripe for the
m




23

opening up of that subject. There have always been conflicting
views in regard to the proper ratio which ought to prevail between the two great money metals, and, in my opinion, it is untimely to invite such differences at a period when it is not the
precise ratio which is at stake, but when the whole theory of bimetallism is assailed and is struggling for existence. I beg to
differ with those good friends who seem to regard the question
of ratio as one of the highest importance. I esteem it of the
least consequence of any of the questions which are incident to
the monetary problem.
_ If the existing ratio is to he changed at all, the feasibility of
which at the present time is of gre.it doubt, it should not be enlarged, but diminished, and put at 15£, so as to correspond with
the ratio under which the silver pieces of the countries composing the Latin Union were coined.
I realize that this is not the popular idea, and that we hear it
everywhere said that the ratio should be increased so that there
shall be more silver in our silver dollar, and then all objections
to free coinage would be obviated. I have heard intelligent men
frequently say, " L e t us have a dollar?s worth of silver in a silver
dollar, and everybody would be satisfied." This is a very narrow and superficial view of a great problem which for its solution depends little upon a mere matter of ratio.
An enlargement of the ratio by this country involves the recoinage of nearly all our silver at a tremendous loss or else its
absolute retirement, which would be disastrous; while a reducof the ratio to lo£ would enable us to recoin at a profit, and thus
place our silver pieces on the same plane as those of European
countries. It is evident, under existing conditions, no European country will recoin at a fearful loss, such as would be
involved in any of the changes now proposed.
If we do anything, we should hold out an inducement to the
Latin Union countries to recoin at a profit instead of a loss, and
that can only be accomplished by reducing the ratio to their
standard, rather than enlarging ours. W e must take a sensible
and practical view of the ratio question, and recollect that ail
changes of policy shou.d be carefully avoided, except for the most
imperative and pressing causes.
It is not the quantity of silver in a silver coin piece that absolutely detarmines its value—it is the legal-tender quality which
is given to it by law. The trade dollar contained considerably
more grains of silver than did the standard dollar, and yet because it was not legal money it soon became worth only what its
bullion was worth in the market. Our silver half dollars dp not
contain in proportion as many grains of silver as do our silver
dollars, and neither do our silver 10-Ceuit pieces; and yet everywhere ten dimes and two half dollars are interchangeable for
each other and for a silver dollar, with the like effect as though
they were "intrinsically" equal, if I may use that term, or equal
in the market, because they,are equal to each other by law and
are a legal tender.
Every elementary writer on the subject of monetary science
does not lay much stress upon or attach much consequence to
the exact ratio, except that it is always desirable that whatever
ratio is established should be uniform, and that such uniformity
should exist in as many countries as possible.
448




24

It is said that the weight pf all the existing silver is eighteen
times the weight of all the gold. But if the quantity of silver
employed as small change is deducted, and^if the aggregate of
silver and the aggregate of gold are valued at the ratio of 15i,
the total value of gold and the total value of silver are found to
be about equal. The great author or inventor of the term u bimetallism" declares that " t h i s is only pure chance, and that
bimetallism is indifferent to it," a n j yet it does tend to establish
the fact that 15i is after all about the right ratio, at least for
successful international bimetallism. It seems to me that the
suggestions of some new ratios—1 to 20,1 to 25,1 to 30—misconceive the nature of the present difficulty and superadd anotnerr
What the market price of silver bullion may happen to be any
day, in the absence of any ratio of free bimetallic coinage, is a
fact that offers no guidance in selecting the ratio f o r its revival.
That is making market price, which can only appear, in the absence of a ratio, determine the ratio, which is inconsistent with
price and excludes price.
There is no price of gold where gold has free coinage, nor of
silver where silver has free coinage. There is no price, but ratio only for either metal where both have iree bimetallic coinage.
THE TRUE ISSUE.

The true issue to be met is simply whether the Sherman law
shoaid be repealed. It is not an issue between monometallism
and bimetallism, between a gold and a silver standard.
The question of the demonetization of silver is not involved.
Speaking in the popular sense, silver was demonetized in 1873.
It is true that a repeal prevents any further coinage of silver,
but it only prevents a restricted coinage such as I have described,
which is worse than no coinage at all. It does not of itself prevent free coinage, because free coinage has not existed since
1873. A repeal can not injure the silver cause; it should help it.
It paves the way for other and better legislation.
The Sherman law has unfortunately become so identified with
the free coinage of silver, and the ill effects of its operation have
been so manifest, that the sooner it is wiped off from the statute
books the better it will be for bimetallism.
Those who foolishly declare that the present contest is between
a gold standard and bimetallism not only misstate the true issue,
but thoughtlessly or designedly injure the cause of repeal.
If I believed for one moment that the repeal of the Sherman
law would injure the cause of bimetallism and would be the means
of placing or tending to place the country upon'a single gold
standard, I should never vote for it, but would as earnestly oppose it as I am now favoring it. And I tell those who seek to
make that issue that if their view of the question involved is
correct and was so understood, the cause of repaal would find
few advocates in either House of Congress. But there is no such
issue. The strongest bimetallist can safely vote for repeal without a violation of his principles. H e will-only clear the way for
their ultimate triumph.
It is said that the President's message by its significant omissions and especially in its closing lines contemplates the establishment of a gold standard as the policy of the country, and
m




25

looks upon the repeal of the Sherman law as a means to that end.
It is to be regretted that the President was not more explicit in
his last utterances. He expressly advised the repeal of the
Sherman law, and then urged other legislation as desirable, but
he left the exact nature thereof in doubt.
It was hoped that the President, in view of the provisions of
the Democratic national platform in favor of a double standard,
and in view of the well-known opinions of a large majority of
his own party in Congress, would have at least spoken a kind or
encouraging word in behalf of a return to bimetallism. It would
certainly have made the path of repeal an easier one, and prevented much, misconstruction and bitterness. But while I regard such omissions as unfortunate, and while conceding that it
is not easy to reconcile the closing words of his message with a
desire for the establishment of a double standard, yet I am not
disposed to accept such a construction of them until further
evidence of his adverse intentions have been manifested. If he
really intended us to understand that he proposed hereafter to
favor the policy of a single gold standard, then I must absolutely
decline to follow him in his new departure.
I shall refuse to follow in the footsteps of any Administration
that seeks to place the Democratic party in a false position, that
seeks to lead it away from its traditions, away from the currency of our fathers, away from 'the path of safety, away from
Democratic principles and platforms and into the very camp of the
enemy. The President must rely upon Republican votes to carry
out any such suicidal policy. I shall not believe, however, that
any such course will be taken by the president of his own volition or even under the inspiration of indiscreet advisers until
clearer evidence shall be furnished than now exists.
I urge a repeal of the Sherman law because it is a hindrance
to free bimetallic coinage; because its practical operation is depleting the Treasury of our gold; because it is hoarding up our
silver bullion, instead of coining it; because it is lowering the
price of silver and creating a greater disparity between silver
and gold every day of its existence; because it has lost the public
confidence, weakened the public credit, and disgraced the silver
cause it was designed to serve.
These are sufficient causes for its repeal without inventing
other reasons about which there might be serious differences
of opinion, and ths discussion of ,which is 'unprofitable at this
crisis.
HASTY ACTION TO BE AVOIDED.

It is a most difficult task at this particular juncture of affairs
to mark out a fixed and definite financial plan for the future
which shall not be subject to revision. W e must not only take
into consideration our own depressed and almost exhausted condition, but we must not ignore the conditions and actions of
other countries. W e must await the effect of India's unfortunate
action. W h a t has she done? She has stopped the free coinage
of silver to individuals, and proposes, as it is understood, to continue it restrictedly, under government direction and control,
through purchases of silver bullion.
In other words, she is imitating the action of the United States,
which in 1873 stopped the free coinage of silver and subsequently
161




26

resumed a limited coinage through Government purchases of
bullion, and the result in India is likely to be equally disastrous
as it has been in America.
India's action was hastened by the contemplated repeal of the
Sherman law by the United States, as the famous Herschell report conclusively shows. She is now following our footsteps,
and will sooner or later reap the same dreadful harvest. But
her action can not be ignored and lightly dismissed, because it
leaves the United States at the present time the only large country, except Mexico, maintaining some system of silver coinage,
assuming that India's government, for the present, ceases all
coinage.
I make the prediction that the attempt to impose a gold standard upon Great Britain's Indian Empire is^ doomed to ultimate
failure. But we must wait and see.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair will remind the Senator from New Y o r k that, the hour of 2 o'clock having arrived, it
becomes the duty of the Chair, under the rule, to lay before the
Senate the unfinished business.
Mr. V A N C E . Mr. President
Mr. H A R R I S . Let the unfinished business be laid before the
Senate.
T h e VICE-PRESIDENT. The unfinished business, being the
resolution reported from the Committee on Privileges and Elections, will be read.
The SECRETARY read the resolution, as follows:
Resolved, That Lee Mantle Is entitled to he admitted to a seat as a Senator
from the State of Montana.

M r . S T E W A R T . I suggest that that go over informally.
Mr. H A R R I S . I ask unanimous consent that the resolution
be informally laid aside in order that the Senator from New York
may conclude his remarks.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there objection to the request of
the Senator from Tennessee?
Mr. V A N C E . Before that is done, to which I have no objection, I wish to ask the Senate to fix a time when we can dispose/
of this matter.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. Is there any objection to the request of the Senator from Tennessee?
Mr. V A N C E . I am willing to defer to the pleasure of the
Senate, but the matter ought to be understood in some way.
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Chair hears no objection to
the request of the Senator from Tennessee. The Senator from
New Y o r k will proceed.
THE TEMPORARY REMEDY.

Mr. H I L L . The temporary relief which the country needs
at this heur is the prompt repeal of the Sherman law. W e can
discuss our monetary theories afterwards. Our duty now is to
stop further silver purchases and relieve an almost bankrupt
Treasury from the drain of gold out of its vaults.
L e t us legislate upon the financial question and then return to
our homes. A t the regular session next December we can resume the consideration of the establishment of a permanent financial system required by the necessities of our great and growing
country. This is not the hour for trying experiments.
m




27

The country's condition forbids it. The patient is sick; we
must cure him of his dangerous temporary fever before we attempt to cure him of his deep-seated dyspepsia or rheumatism.
" O n e thing at a t i m e " is a good motto in business as well as
sometimes in politics and legislation.
The goal for which the country should steadily strive is, first,
international bimetallism—an agreement with at le,;st a few
leading nations—and if that is absolutely impossible of achievement, then independent bimetallism at the earliest moment when
the condition of our finances and conditions ^bro.d will safely
warrant it. It is impossible to say in advance when th xt moment
will arrive. It may never come. It certainly is not at present.
There must be adequate preparation, revised laws, competent
administration and friendly administration before such a result
can be secured.
The condition of our Treasury forbids it to-day, but I indulge
the hope that in the near future the existing conditions in this
and other countries may change for the bstter, and we may be
enabled safely to return to the wise policy which we so foolishly
abandoned in 1873. It is useless to disguise the fact ih „t the
situation has greatly changed for the worse during tha past
year. The increasing disorder of our finances and the recent
action of India have complicated the financial problem and rendered it more difficult of solution.
It is possible that such action of the India government may
render the adoption of independent bimetallism inadvisable or
impossible for some time to come. I hope not; but we must
proceed cautiously and prudently in the management of the financial affairs of a great nation. Much must depend upon the future
policy of India. Nothing can be safely done without the support of a reasonable share of the public confidence, and I fear
that the adoption of independent bimetallism in the present
great crisis would be regarded as a dangerous experiment.
Our duty to our country and to the cause of bimetallism can
best bs subserved by a prompt repeal of a concededty obnoxious
measure, taking the precaution at the same time that the effect
of such repeal shall not be misconstrued either at home or abroad.
It is not wise or feasible, for reasons to which I have alluded, to
couple with such repeal any new or affirmative financial legislation, but it is desirable and all-important that the repealing bill
'should itsalf declare in general terms what the future financial
policy of this Government is desired or intended to be. Such a
course prevents misinterpretation of our action abroad, and reassures our own people as to the policy to which our efforts are
proposed to be directed.
W h a t h^rm c i n result from such an expression? W h o can
properly object to it? W h a t Senator at least upon the Democratic side can refuse to vote for such a plain and explicit declaration of our principles? It is simply the substance of the
Chicago platform embodied and reaffirmed in a statute. It is
import nt in order that a repeal shall not be regarded as an
abandonment of bimetallism—a victory for monometallism, a defeat for silver, a return to a gold standard, or a destruction of
our silver industries, or a triumph of a score of other false and
misle ding issues which have unfortunately been injected into
this contest.
164




303

Her© is the declaration in full.

And it Is hereby declared to be the policy of the United States to continue
the use of both gold and silver as standard money, and to coin both gold and
silver into money of equal intrinsic and exchangeable value, such equality
to be secured through international agreement or by such safeguards of
legislation as wUl insure the maintenance of the parity in value of the coins
of the two metals, and the equal power of every dollar at all times in the
markets and in the payment of debts. And it is hereby further declared
that the efforts of the Goverjiment should be steadily directed to the establishment of such a safe system of bimetallism as will maintain at all times
the equal power of every dollar coined or issued by the United States In the
markets and in the payment of debts.

This declaration which I have quoted, and which is appropriately embodied in the present bill reported by the Finance
Committee, will give encouragement to Balfour and his associates, the friends of international bimetallism in England, and
aid them in their heroic efforts to establish a double standard.
It will assist the cause of bimetallism everywhere in the world.
It commits this Government to a definite general policy which
no Administration, no matter how stropglv it may regard itsolf
as intrenched in the affections of the people, will dare to disregard. Its excellent results may not be witnessed now, but they
will be realized in the future.
Let us not be impatient, but abide our time. W e accept no
compromise with principle, but we rid ourselves and our cause
from the incubus of an illogical, unsafe, and unpopular law, and
obt in in its stead the most important declaration of future
policy ever recorded in a statute.
More than that we should not expect or ask at this time, and
less than that we can not honorably accept. If you ask me if the
bill unconditionally repeals the Sherman law, I answer yes—and
no. Yes, in the sense that it absolutely repeals that act, and
contains no distinct, affirmative financial legislation, such as
has been insisted upon here and elsewhere; but no, in the sense
that it does cont iin a mo >t important condition or qualification,
virtually limiting its significance or declaring how the effect of
such repeal shall be construed, or, rather, preventing its misconstruction.
Of course there is no legal legislation in favor of bimetallism
such as could be enforced in a court of law, but there is moral
legislation therein—a declaratory policy embodied in it, a pledge
of the faith of the Government is set forth—a binding, honorable
obligation upon future legislators, cabinets, and Presidents.
President Cleveland could not approve that law to-day, if we'
should pass it, and next December take any position upon legislation or upon financial questions based upon the theory that the
policy of this Government is any other than bimetallism as
therein solemnly declared. The concession contained in the latter portion of the bill can not be overestimated, and its practical
value will be more and more appreciated as time rolls on and as
the contests of the future sh ill be developed. No gold monopolist could approve such a measure, and no public man, no matter how exalted he may be, could afford to deliberately deceive
and betray the American people upon such a question.
ALL SHOULD VOTE FOR REPEAL.

No one, be he a Democrat, Republican,or Populist, should be
deterred from voting for this bill simply because it is hailed as an
164




29

Administration measure. That furnishes no argument either
for or against it. I resent the impertinent suggestion of those
sycophants who are const mtly posing as the personal or especial
friends of the Administration, and who whisper in our ears every
day that the Administration wants this and does not want that,
and we must not vote so as to displease the Administration.
Sir, I know of but one rule of conduct that has guided my
official action here, and which will continue to guide it to the
end. If a measure seems to me to be right and proper and meets
my approval, I shall support it, and if it does not meet my conscientious judgment I shall oppose it, and the wishes, views, or
suggestions of any Administration will have no effect in influencing that result.
As you well know, I was for the repeal of this bill long before
the present Administration c ime into power, and by my voice,
pen, and influence contributed my humble share toward the
creation of that public sentiment in regard to it which is.so well
nigh vmanimous in my own State. My distingushed colleague
and myself will cheerfully vote for this bill, u una wed by power
and uncorrupted by Federal patronage." [Applause in the galleries.]
The VICE-PRESIDENT. The Senator from New Y o r k will
suspend. The Chair reminds the occupants of the galleries that
applause will not be permitted. Should there be a repetition of
this offense, it will be necessary to have the galleries cleared.
Mr. H I L L . The President is entitled to my support and that of
every other Democratic Senator when he recommends a meritorious measure which is expressly approved in the platform of the
party which nominated and elected him to the high office which
he h o l d s / He could do no less than recommend the repeal of the
Sherman bill, because such repeal was made a part of the Democratic creed at Chicago. It was his duty so to do, and he has
simply discharged that duty, and that is all.
He deserves also in this instance the support of all the other
Senators, because the measure which he recommends is demanded by the best interests of the country and is essential to
its welfare and prosperity.
REPEAL WHitj TRIUMPH.

Mr. President, .this bill is going to pass this Senate. I believe
it; I predict it. The sentiment in its favor is growing stronger
each day under the light of discussion. The sober second
thought of the distinguished Senators who compose this circle—
th^ir calm, deliberate, unprejudiced judgment—will in the end
eventually impel them to the conclusion that aftsr all the route
of repeal is the safest, best, and surest path to pursue. I have
confidence in the wisdom, the discernment, and the patriotism
of the American Senate, and we can safely trust its conscientious
determination of every great public question presented to it at
a critical period like this.
There will be some delay, vexatious though it may be regarded
by the public, whose impatience is excusable under the trying
ordeal through which our business interests are passing, but such
delay is inevitable in a body where deliberation has been its leading characteristic for a century, but there will be no disappoint-




30

meht in the final result. There will be debate, a full comparison
of views, an endeavor to do the right thing, and then a prompt
and honest decision.
There will be no filibustering upon such a subject as this, nonpolitical in its charactar, involving purely financial questions
about which there always have been and always will be honest but
respectful differences of opinion among men, although questions
not involving life, liberty, or the vital principles of free governin nt. An / other course in this fearful crisis would be unworthy
of the Senate, and the Senate will respect itself.
Let our business men who are laboring under fearful burdens
and ag linst great obstacles and embarrassments take courage at
the prospect. The present clouds of adversity which so heavily
Overhang these dark and gloomy days will soon pass away, and
reiiei will su.ely come. I think X see a bright, clear silver lining to the clouds in the West which now threaten danger, and
m the near future that light will become stronger,, better, more
eiful e'nl under the rays and inspirations of an educated public
sentiment desirous of justice, freed from passion, prejudice, and
selfishness, and will guide the country back to the sure ground
of st ible prosperity, the right financial policy, and the monetary
pr nciples of our fathers, from which it has so wonderfully and
frightfully wandered in recent years.
Then our commerce will return to us, our industries will revive, our exeh mges will reopen, the avenues of business will
a ound with activity, confidence will be resumed, and credit
will be restored.
This Republic is not going to be shipwrecked on account of
b id fin nciering.^ No; it will weather the present storm. Too
much is it stake in its preservation, too many hopes are centered
ia its saccess, too m iny prayers are ascending for its safe deliverance for it now to be destroyed.
Divided though we may be in our political opinions and diverse
as re our fin ncial views, we none of us forget that this nation
b * longs to no p .1 ty nor faction, but it is our country that is in
peril our prosperity that is to be promoted, and our liberties
which are to be protected.
n the beautiful and appropriate language of a distinguished
American statesman, in speaking of the value of our free institutions and of the inestim .ble boon of lib >rty bequeathed to us
th oagh the blood and sacrifices of our revolutionary forefathers,
" T h i s priceless heritage of freedom is ours; ours to enjoy, ours
to possess, ours to transmit."
m




O