Memphis daily appeal. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1847-1886, 1870-06-30
ion. They had a currency
4 natinnal lank nntas and

rejected, and a new Conference Con
mittee appointed, the Senate WOul
! concur substantially in the provision
made by the House.
Armstrong expressed the belief tina
any policy looking to the contraction
Of the currency would be injurious {
the business interests of the country
and regarded the conference re
port as a protective measure Of cor
traction, at least to the amount {
nine millions. He thought the Wises
policy would be to reject the repOr
even though the bill should fail.
Mr.. Cox expressed an opinion tina
the measure was not much of cOntrac
ton or expansion it might work
little contraction at first hut it WOulC
produce an expansion and explosion
It was a bill which satisfied neither
the House nor anybody; neither con
tractiOnistS nor eXpansiOnists. Whar
Congress should do was to marcf
boldly up to the measure of a return
to gold and silver as the President had
recommended.
MIR. 8urghard also condemned the
conference report, particularly be
cause the Committee had abandoned
ninetytive million dollars additional
issue which would have reached all the
States having les than their airshare
OF distribution OF currency.
Mr.. Morgan also approved the
report as being d measure Of cOntrac-
tjnn:
sNIr. TngersolI thought it would
hardly dO, when people We're asking
Congress for bread, to give them a
stone, and he imagined that the
present preparation was no more or
less than that lie believed IUur-ffths of
the people, if there could be a popular
vote had on the subject, would vote
in favor Of the increase Of currency,
that, too, in the shape of greenbacEa,
rather than national oanR notes.
MIR. Townsend also opposed the re-
port, because he looked upon it as a
measure Of great expansion.
Mr.. Benton characterized it e. the
most arranJ nonsense talk. He is in
favor of imitation or expansion, and
was twitted considerably by Messrs.
ltldridge and lngersUil as to his own
views on green backs, but was anus
ingly successful in keeping these views
to himself.
Mr.. Jones advocated the confer
ence report, and stated facts showing
Of redistribution of the cur
renCy. He was afraid unless the con-
ference report was agreed to the bill
would fail. He approved the report
because it met his views to their full
and he believed it was the
best the House could get.
Mr.. Garfield closed the discussion
by q speech in advocacy of the report.
As to the point that the report
was a measure of contraction, he
called attention to the remarkable
spectacle presented in the House by
two exceedingly able and intelligent
gentlemen from Pennsylvania, both Of
Jhem intimetely connected with the
national banking system; one of
them, Armstrong, had made a speech
the report because it was q
measure of contraction; the other,
had made a speech
it as a measure of in
hdtiOn. That was as high a COM
as the report could have
been because it was clearly provided
by one that it was not a contraction,
and by the other that it was not in
hatiOn, and that was Just what the
conference of the House and Senate
had expected to reach. These gentle
men who had figured up the cOutrac
ton of the bill ignored the fact i'm
starting the additional fOrty-dve mil
lion currency in places now destitute
Of credit. The business of the cOun-
try would be increased by a whole
volume of checks and drafts issued
from hand to hand, in order to pre-
vent contraction being worked by the
withdrawal Of three per cent. which
We're always liable to be presented
for redemption. The Committee on
proposed to have an addi-
tiOnal issue Of fOrty-tive million Of
National Bank Currency, which is to
be distributed as follows: Virginia,
81 Loss, ,S63; West Virginia, S3sl, ,4gl;
SS99, ,6S9; Michigan, S6j5, $50;
Wisconsin, $l,7G5, ,039; Iowa, Sj67,-
o32; Kansas, Sl4j,6Ol; Missouri,
s., 500, ,469; Kentucky, 50, 3,S76, ,32I; Ten
nessee, 1909, ,9S2; Louisiana, 1921,
223; Mississippi, -, 1873, ,57I; Nebraska,
S5ISO; Georgia, 50, 900, ,G3S; North Car
OIina, S34l5, ,G96; South Carolina, So
jlA,2lOj Alabama, $3,4ll, 1855; Oregon,
5l3i, 40l; Texas, 81 1913, ,5Sl; Arkansas,
81 ,2l2,gg4; Utah, SIS, ,6l3; California,
ST, 43I, ,230; Florida, $I5j, 39l; Dakotah,
81, SOS; New Mexico, S23l ,627; Wash
ingtOn Territory, S39, ,3l9.
Mr.. Butler, of Massachusetts. asked
Mr.. Garfield if he expected the mem
bers to vote for the report if two able
and experienced gentlemen like those
from Pennsylvania could not agree to
what it meant.
Mr.. Garfield replied that if the gem
tIeman from Mass sachusetts did not
the need, he need not vote
for it.
Mr.. Garfield did not expect per
son who talked of gold and silver as q
relic of financial barbarism would
vote for such a bill. He added that it
would square better with his own no.
tiOns to let these Western men who Cp-
posed it fight their own battles. Ifthey
did not take his bill, they would, in
his judgment, get nothing. He ridi-
culed Mr.. lngerSOlPs notions about
coin, paper dollars and a cheap kind
Of currency, illustrating the latter
idea by suppOsing a currency of
stamped cabbage leaves.
Mr.. IugersOll retOrted that he pre-
ferrCd cabbage leaves to cabbage
heads, on this question.
A vote was then taken, agreeing to
the conference report, and itAWas re-
ectgd. Yeas, 50; nays, 1872.
On motion of Mr.. Judd, another
Committee was ordered.
Mr.. Paine asked that Tuesday and
of next week, be as
signed the Committee of Elections,
to the House that he might
i'm that time dispose of ten, fifteen or
twenty contested election cases. OBJ
lection made.
Mr.. Paine gave notice that he
would call up cases as question Of
The Speaker intimated they be
open to question whether the House
would consider them.
Mr.. Sargent, from the Committee
On Appropriations, reported back the
Senate amendment to the Indian APP
bill, and proceeded to ex-
plain them to the House. With ac-
lion recommended by the Committee,
5he House adjourned.
i@9.l..assz1zsssaas
Pittsburu.
PITTsBURG, June 29.-The fire at
a.