The Anderson intelligencer. [volume] (Anderson Court House, S.C.) 1860-1914, 1878-02-21
Hon. Thomas A. Hendricks.
NEW YoRK. Feb. Q. 19'

Hol. Thomas A. Hendricks has tele-
graphed the Herald reply to August
Belmont's letter, published in the same
journal Jan. so. MIR. Hendricks says:
The purpose of his (Belmont's) letter
was to show that the views attributed to
me on the silver question are inconsis-
tent with opinions heretofore expressed,
and therefore it cannot be correctly re-
ported. The report in the Cincinnati
Commercial was correct. l very much
desire to be considered consistent, but I
would rather be certain l am right than
consistent upon this question. | think /
haves Been consistent. MIR. Belmont
quotes me as holding that since the act
Of March IS, 1869, the bonded debt must
be paid ia gold, as contradistinguished
from paper or silver. In that he is not
correct. The bill to strengthen. the peo-
ple's credit was pending in the Senate in
February, 1869. I made an argument
against thu section which held the faith
of the Government to the payment of
the bonds in coin. opposed it because
1 thought that the contract allowed the
payment of the principal of the FIVE
twenty bonds to be made in Treasury
notes.
Mr.. Belmont takes one sentence to show
that I held that the effect of the measure
would be to pay i'm gold. Had Mr.. Bel
mort read more carefully he would have
seer that ] read the section containing.
these words: "That the faith of the Uni.
ted States is solemnly pledged to the
spayment'in coin or its equivalent" and
that then said: "It will cause the re.
movaI Of doubts, and make the law to
read that che debs shall be- paid in coin..
That is the effect Of this section," Upon
that construction I made my argument
against the section, not as in controversy
whether payment should be in silver as
against gold, but whether it might be in
paper as against coin. 1t was not ques.
toned in that debate that silver was coin,
and that the debt would be payable in
silver, ,whather that section passed or did
not pass. The section, substantially as
I read il in the Senate, became law nine
teen days afterwards. Its force and effect
did not become question OF political
controversy in Indiana in 1872, but it did
euter into the discussion of 1874. In
the Democratic Convention of that year
resolution was passed declaring the
$40 bonds payable in greenbacks. 1
presided over that convention, and as /
could not give ths.t resolution my support
/ took occasion at the first public meet
ing which I Iaddressedlin Indianapolis to
say so, and to give my reasons. ] thought
then, as l believe now, that after the
faith Of the nation was pledged to pay
ment in coin, we could not pay in Treas
-ury notes; that purchasetsof bonds after
that date took them relying upon that
pledge, ard that we are bound by it.
That WIS my argument before the peo-
pie. Neither my hearers nor I thought
of the question whether payment could
be made in silver. 1t was not then
known to myself, and suppose not to
one of the audience, that the silver dol
lar had been. discarded. :,
Mr.. Belmont refers tothat address, aud
to the use of the word "gold" in it, in-
stead Of the word "coin," as committing
me to the payment of the debt in gold,
and not in silver. The only question
then discussed was the right TO pay in
greenbacks. The right to pay in silver
was not then questioned or considered in
Indiana. In the address which / made
as President of the convention, two
months before, my opinions upon the
currency were somewhat fully expressed.
then said: awe cannot too strongly
express the importance of the policy
that shall restore uniformity of value to
all the money of the country, 80 that it
shall be always and readily converted.
That gold aud silver are the real standard
of value, is cherished Democratic SEN
timent, not now nor hereafter to be aban-
doned." I certainly could not have used
that language in the campaign of 1874,
and known that silver was no longer
money. ."-
A more important question made by
Mr.. Belmont is that the argument which
excludes the payment of the public debt
in treasury notes under the act of March,
1869, applies with greater force under
the act of 1873, which excludes the sil-
Yer dollar from the coinage. l think
that is not correct. The act Of 1869 was
to remove any doubt, to settle the con-
ficting interpretations of the laws under
which the public obligations were con-
tracted, and to pledge the faith of the
United States to the payment Of such
obligation in coin. After full conside-
ration, it became Law. 1t was soon fol-
lowed by the act to authorize the refund
ing ofthe national debt. That law provi.
ded that 81, 500, 100000 ofbonds, which it
authorized, should be redeemable in coin
of the present standard value. Because
the act of 1869 was q solemn pledge of
my country, made by competent author
ity, 1 felt that it was binding, 80 binding,
indeed, that it could only be repealed to
the prejudice of those to whom 1t was
given.