The daily gazette., 1877-12-19


epahets. If under the law as It stands the
holders of the five-twenties can only be
pald In gold, then we are repudfatOrs If we
propose to pay otherwise. 1.-THE bOndhoLd-
ef can tegduy demand only the kind Of money
ne pad, h'n he is a repudidtor and e1tortton-
gaze.
Truly yours, JOHN SHERMAN.
And yet we are told by the gentlemen
who purchased our bonds that they had
right to believe and did believe that
they were to be paid in gold: and this,
too, in the face of the language upon
every greenback and, as | shall presently
show, in every law that was ever enact>
ed ; this, too, in the face of the debates
in both branches of Congress. Had the
bondholders never read the endorsement
on every legal-tender? Had they never
read or heard of the debates in Congress?
Certainly they had and knew all about
them. Why was that endorsement put
on every legal-tender? Can any Sena-
tor answer me Was it to notify the
world or was it intended TO cheat and
defraud the citizen? One or the other
was the purpose. There is nowhere to
be found any law saying that our bonds
shall be paid in gold. They are made
payable either in paper money or in coin,
but never in gold. The bonds known
as the 20 bonds issued under the act
of February 25, 1869, were made paya>
BILE, the principal in dollars, without
specifying the kind of dollars. They
might by that law have been paid in pa
per, gold, or silver but the interest was
made payable in coin. Why specify that
the interest was to be paid in coins Does
not the argument necessarily follow that
the principal could be paid in something
else than coin?
Again, if Senators will turn 10 the
very statute authorizing the issuance of
these bonds (12 United States Statutes
at Large, 345) they will find the same
act authorized the issuance of $150,000,-
900 of legal>tenders and provided that
the bonds might be paid for In these
very legal tenders or any others heretofore
or hereafter issued ard further provided
that said notes,or legal-tenders as we now
term them, shall be ga legal tender in
payment of all debts, public and private,
within the United States, except duties
on imports and interest as aforesaid"
And yet, in the face of all this, we are
told that the purchasers believed that
these bonds were and are to be paid in
gold. How preposterous the PROPOSE
tion
Again, Congress seems to have been
most abundantly cautious, for in every
bond ever issued the law authorizing its
issuance is specially referred to in the
following language "This debt is au-
thorized ty act of Congress approved"-
oft Srul, ioI, Gil Ha .Iotn haf
one wishing to purchase was, in the very
bond he was proposing to purchase, re-
ferred to the law. How could any body
be misled? ? No body was mlsled. The
Government was as particular and eau
tious as the agent who, acting under a
power of attorney, should, in the con-
veyance he made as such agent, insert
in totidem Uerbis his power of attorney.
In the bonds known as the A per cent
bonds is found the following language :
| to be paid Sin coin of the standard value
of the United States on said July ID
1870, with interest in such coin." Meth
er the law nor the bond says "gold coin. .
but "of the standard value of the United
States on said July IA, 1870" Here the
Government and the purchasers stipulat-
ed for coin of certain standard value
Yet, we are told by the Executive in his
message;
To require the public creditors to take in
repayment any dollar of less commercial
value would be regarded by them as re-
pudiation of the full obligation assumed
The Government did not and would
not bind itself to pay in coin of certain
or any commercial value. The credits
ors, the purchasers of the bonds, the
other contracting party, would not and
did not bind themselves TO receive pay
ment in coin of a certain or any COM
mercial value. The contract was for a
certain standard value. 1 have no doubt
the law was thus framed, the bond thus
drawn, the contract thus made at the in
stance of the creditors. What right have
they now to complain, much less to call
| it reputation?
On the 18th of July, 1870, under the
act of which date these per cent. bonds
are issued, the silver dollar contained
412! grains of standard silver sand was
the legal equivalent of the gold dollar,
which then contained, as it does now,
25.S grains of standard gold"
The bill to remonetize silver, as 1t
passed the House, provides for the silver
dollar to contain 4124 grains of standard
value. If this bill should become law,
as hope it will, the bondholders can be
paid in either gold or silver of the stand
ard value of July IA, 1870. That is the
contract.
In other words the parties contracted
for so many grains of silver or gold. We
propose to carry out the contract, both in
letter and spirit, and give them the
"pound of flesh," but not "drop of
blood" drawn from the teeming millions
now crying for bread. Neither of the
contracting parties would agree to give
or receive gold or silver at its CONNER
cial value so emphatically insisted upon
in the message of the Executive, for that
was uncertain and depended upon con-
tingencies; but the standard value was
fixed and certain. Let us test this: Sup
pose to-day A should contract to deliver
to B thousand bushels of wheat at the
expiration of five years. At the time of
the contract the commercial value of
wheat is $1.50 per bushel, but at the date
of the performance of the contract the
commercial value of wheat is only fifty
cents per bushel. Would it be repudia-
ton, would it be wrong in morals, for
NINR rNEl HI