Morning journal and courier., 1886-01-25
COMMUNICATIONS.
Senator Van Wyek and the S1iy
 

Senator Van Wyek and the Silver Question.
 To the Editor of the JOURNAL AND COURIER:
 In the United States Senate the other day bill was introduced by MT. Van Wyck gro prevent the demonetization of American coin by certain persons in the United States. " Among other provisions were the following: Section Any promissory note, check, draft. bill of exchange or any ntract or agreement re- quiring the payment of money which stipuates and requires the payment thereof to be in gold coin alone shall be void and of no effect
 Section 3.-Any person, or the agent or attorney
 such note draft bill of exchange other contract or agreement requiring the payment of money in
 punished by fine of not less than one half
 than the full amount mentioned in such promissosy
 note draft bill of exchange or contract of agree ment.
 Senator Van Wyck has defined with exact
 ness the final position which the advocates of
 continued compulsory coinage of silver
 must defend. They know that two dollars of different values cannot coexist in trade; that the cheaper must displace the dearer; and that some must gain and others must lose by the consequent change of nominal value. And 1t is not difficult for them to predicG that the wage receiver will not gain, nor the small depositor in savings banks; but, as Senator Van Wyck perceives, that the so-called capitalist is the one who is going to make money out of the transaction unless the law prevents him. The law proposed is, of course, absurd; the learned Senator might as we'll deny my right to contract for sweet potatoes alone as for gold coin alone, but the significance of the thing lies in the admission that some such law seems to him to be necessary. That admission goes to the root of the issue, for the question is altogether one of expediency. Concede 1,ot cfcr iJs Sil is not a technical repudiation, yet it may nevertheless be practically followed by the results of a repudiation; for adroltness in the construction of 8 statute will not neces- sarily prevent the effects which have always been observed to follow debasement of the silver men have maintained that there was to be no debasement | of the standard They have technical proof of that, too, but the practical question has been whetEer the gold dollar and the silver dollar would be of the same value measured l in potatoes or something else to be eaten. It has always been said that for domestic com equality or that the laws of finance were such l that the equality would come of itself; that is | to say, there would be no substantial readlast 1 ment of values except in foreign exchanges, That has been the position of the silver ad- yocates on the question of expediency. But
 
 CTS have brought them into contact with the l facts of history have admitted that, if any material difference existed between the pur chasing power of the two dollars, all the evils of a readjustment of values to the lower standard must follow. What those evils are 1 is matter of history, and to all ex- cept those who defend disturbance for l the sake of disturbance the expediency of continued compulsory coinage of silver l IS determined by the probable presence or absence of those evils. But to those who have asserted or believed that no such financial | agitation would follow, this proposed law of Senator Van Wyck is interesting because it l is the deliberate confession of an ardent ad vocate that government indebtedness cannot safely be paid in silver without making it q misdemeanor to buy gold coin
 No doubt the Senator's apprehension is of 8 conspiracy of gold bugs. But in
 what is he engaged when he proposes | the sight of a spread eagle on silver | dollar of specified weight and fneness excites | in his breast an uncomfortable spasm of un- selfish patriotism? Or that this measure is | the result of an irresponsible sensibility2-for l there are men who faint away at the sight of
 8 cat, and it is possible that the Senator's zeal is purely nervous. But this measure F ] strictly logical; history demonstrates that l the attempt to debase coinage is always fol l lowed by unjust laws for its enforcement; I and that such laws are ineffective l for the reason that by coincidence
 which is not altogether fortuitous they are invariably as stupid as they are meddlesome.
 In the present case, for instance, there is
 nothing which provides against mans buy ing any quantity of gold coin provided he takes one dollar of it in silver, for the pro vision regards contracts for the payment of | money ''in gold coin alone" And with all | respect to Senator VanWyck and his colabor-
 CTS in the vineyard, the utter ineffectiveness of l this measure ftly indicates the station of l financial intelligence which they represent.