Public ledger. [volume] (Memphis, Tenn.) 1865-1893, 1878-02-02
HENDRICKS
Replies to August BeImOnt's
Attack ON His Con-
slsteRcy.
Never Doubted that the Debt
Would be Payable in Silver.

NAh AohAt RcufuatJ A-AOu. 4uOo'
A. Hendricks has telegrapAed the Herald
a reply to August Belmont's letter, pub
hshed in the same Journal January 30th.
Mr., Hendricks says: "The purpose Of
bis (Belmont's) letter was to show that
the views attributed to me on the silver
question are inconsistent with opinions
heretofore expressed, aud, therefore, that
| cannot be correctly reported. The re.
port in the Cincinnati Commercial was
correct l very much desire to be con-
siesred consistent, but | would rather be
certain | am right than consistent upon
this question. l think l have been cor
sistent. Mr.. Belmont quotes me as hold.
ing that since the act Of March IS, 1869,
the bonded debt must be paid in gold as
cOntradistinguished from paper or silver.
In that he is not correct. The bill
to strengthen the peoples credit
was pending in the senate in Feb.
ruary, 1869. l made an argument
against the section which pledged the
faith of the government to the payment
OF the bonds in coin. | opposed it be-.
cause / thought the contract allowed the
payment Of the principal of the 6ve-
twenty bonds to be made in treasury
NOTES. Mr.. Belmont takes one sentence
to show that / held that the effect OF the
measure would be to pay in gold. Had
Mr.. Belmont read more carefully he
would have seen that / read the section
containing these words: That the faith
of the United States is solemnly pledged
to the payment of coin or its equivalent"
and that / then said, at will cause the
removal of doubts and make the Law to
read that the debt shall be paid in CON-"
That is the effect of this section. Upon
that construction | made my argument
against the section, not as in contro-
versy whether payment should be in
silver as against gold, but whether it
might be in paper as against coin. 1t
was not questioned 10 that debate that
silver vas coin and hat the debt would
be payable in silver. Whether that sec.
ton passed or did not pass, the section,
substantially as l read it in the senate,
became q law nineteen days afterward.
Its force and effect did not become 9
question Of political controversy in In
diana in 1872, but it aid enter into the
discussion of 1874. In the Democratic
convention of that year a resolution was
erased declaring the 5 20 bonds payable
in g%reenbacks, l presided wei that
convention, and as l could not give that
resolution my support, 1 took OCCASION
at the first meeting which l addressed to
say SO and to give my reasons. l thought
then as believe now, hat after the faith
OF the nation was pledged to payment in
coin we could not pay in treasury notes;
that purchasers of bonds after that date
took them relying upon that pledge, and
that we are bound by it. That was my
argument before the people. Neither
my hearers nor l thought Of the ques-
ton whether payment could be made in
silver. 1t was not then doubted. 1t was
not then known to myself and | suppose
not to one of my audience that silver
dollars had been discarded. Mr.. Bel.
mont refers to that address, and to the
use of the word gold in it, instead Of
the word coin, as committing ne to the
payment of the debt ia 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 ques.
toned or considered in Indiana"
THE completion of Mr.. Hendricks
letter was received too late fer insertion
in to day issue Of the LEDGER.