River Falls journal. [volume] (River Falls, Pierce County, Wis.) 1872-2019, 1878-03-07
SOME MORE ABOUT FACTS.

denom1nate 1t falSeho0d denotes a
capacity for transformation that in
this age photographs and railroads is
exceedingly rare. Honest and intel
ligent anti-silver advocates. after
casually glancing at the record, have
not attempted to justify the means
used, but the end attained.
If Professor Earthman will look
carefully he will find that the bill
which became law Feb. II, 1873, did
not demonetize silver. 1t simply au-
thorized the coinage of certain silver
pieces, emitting the sitUer dollar in one
clause, and then further on providing
that, ''no, coins either of gold, silver,
or minor coinage, shall hereafter be
issued from the mint other than those
of the denominations, standards, and
weights herein set forth" These
clauses were widely separated, and a
careful reading was necessary 60 dis
close the fact that the paternal dollar
was to be no more. Not until June
1874, however, was the great silent
job finished when this little clause was
struggled into the Revised Statutes;
s'1he silver coins Sof the United
States shah be legal tender at their
nominal value for any amount not ex-
ceeding five dollars in any one pay
ment.''
This ended the work of the conspir-
ators.
Silver could not have been demone-
tized openly. The gold bugs knew
this, and hence the resort to strategy.
The very title of the bill is evidence of
it, there being nothing in it indicating
that which it's passage accomplished.
Why was an act changing one of the
standards of value hidden in s'An act
revising and amending the laws rela-
tive to the minis, assay offices, and
coinage of the United States g Be-
cause title indicative of its charac-
ter would have provoked discussion,
and discussion would have brought
defeat.
The Professor says the bill was "dis
cussed at length in 10th branches of
Congress. Is it possible that bill
was discussed at length and the
chairman of the House ignorant of its
Import? James G. Blaine who was
speaker at the time, acknowledged to
Mr.. Voorhees, the other day in open
senate. that he did'not know the eff
feet of the bill whom it r,ensetl.
Is it possible for bill not cunningly
devised and put through by stealth to
receive the Presidents signature, and
yet he ignorant of its effect Presi-
dent Grant did not know the import of
the bill. In letter written to Mr..
Cowdry Oct 3, 1873, eight months af-
ter signing the bill he said among 9TH
er things, 81 Wonder that silver is not
already coming into the market to sup
pin the deficiency IN the circulating
medium. 1t UiU become the standard
of pdLxes aohich wiU be boarded an q
small rag. But / a0G1ot TO see a
boarding of something that IS q stan
dard of ratue the world oUer. Sitrer
is this
The Professor says the bill was ''dis-
cussed at length by such men as Hoop
er, Kelley, Garfield" &c. Mr.. Kelley
stated in Congress that he knew moth
ing about the bill. Is it possible then
that it was discussed at length by
him? Is it possible that Gen. Gar
field--a leader in Congress- discuss
ed at length" the bill and yet didn't
know what was in it? In a discussion
with George A. Pendleton Sept. 81,
1877, the Gen. said:
my friend put the categorical cues
tion TO me whether, at the time the tar
pasSed, aoaS dware Of the effect that
tar aoould hare. Perhaps 1 ought TO
be ashamed 10 sag so, but 1t IS the truth
to san that /, at that time being chair
man of the Committee ON Approprid-
tions, and haUing my hands oUerfuH
during all that time ruth goOrk, ner-
en- read the bill took 1t upon the
faith of a prominent Democrat and q
prominent Republican, and 4 don {
klow that roted at all. There aDGs
no call Of the ayes and mays and no
body opposed the bill that 1 k11oa0 Of IL
acas put through as dozens Of other
bills are as mig friend and knoW, IN
Congress, on the faith Of the report Of
the chairman Of the coplnaitte; there
fore. / tell you, because 1t is the truth,
that Ihdre no knowledge about u.
And finally is it possible that the
bill could have been discussed at
length" in Congress and not have been
understood; and being understood, is
it probable that every newspaper IN
the land would have refrained from
making public so important matter
as the downfall of our unit of value
Irepeat therefore that Congress did
MT know what it was doing; and II
the bill was not got through by both
stealth and fraud plead ignorance OF
| the terms.
| challenge the Professor to point
out member of Congress with per-
haps one exception who does ac-
knowledge that he knew the effect OF
the bill at the time of its passage.
| If he cannot, what about its being
s.discussed at length - | challenge
him also TO point out a solitary news
paper, printed within two years after
the passage of the bill, containing the
least intimation that the old silver dol
lar was demonetized. IF he cannot
will he still persist in saying that sill
- "a daronnafizad hy stealth :