Los Angeles herald., 1890-07-09
Senator Vest Attacks the
New Bill.
Coke Also Argues Against the
Measure.
Sherman Defends the Conference
Committees Report.
Teller and Stewart Succumb to the
Inevitable and Accept the
Compromise.
Associated Press Dispatches.


report. He said large majority of the
senate had voted for the free coinage of
silver, but the conference report abso-
lutely did away with all idea of free
coinage, and was intended to continue
the system under which silver has been
persistently degraded since 1873. He
was anxious to see an absolute parity
between the two metals as money metals.
die would like to see the time when six
teen ounces of silver would purchase an
ounce of gold, and when an ounce of
gold would continue, as at present, to
purchase sixteen ounces of silve. He
read the closing clause of the second
section of the conference bill, cit being
the established policy of the United
State to maintain the two metals on a
parity with each other upon the present
legal ratio, or such ratio as may
be provided by law" and asked
why that declaration had been
inserted; why that stump speech had
been injected into the stomach of the
bill. 1t had been put in, he said, for
the purpose of saying to the treasury
department that until silver had come
to a parity with gold it should pay out
gold, and public business should be con-
Quoted on gold basis. He, for one,
would never vote to maintain and con-
tinue that practice. He had never been
"silver man" for the purpose OF BOOM
ing silver or increasing its price. He
was against that and all other forms of
subsidy. The conference bill might
give an increased market for silver, but
the principle for which the senate voted,
that the two metals should be on par
ity, had been given away in that bill,
absolutely and completely.
Coke Concurs With Vest.
Coke expressed concurrence in the
conclusion reached by Vest. He could
not support the conference bill. The
senate conferees had not represented
clared for the free and unlimited coin
age of silver. On the con-
trary, they had assented to a
bill which provided definitely for
cessation of the further coinage of sill
yer at all. There was no compulsion on
the secretary of the treasury to coin sill
yer after the 1st OF July, 1891. Silver
coinage was then left to the discretion
of the secretary, and such discretion was
equal to stopping the coinage of silver.
That was fact we'll known and admit
ted in debate. He was opposed to buy
ing single ounce of silver now, not to
be coined. Hewa opposed to the United
States going into the warehouse busi-
ness for silver or any other products. If
silver was not to be coined why should
it be purchased? If the object of the
bill was to advance the money power of
silver, why should its coinage be stopped
when coinage alone conferred upon it
the power of money? Two-thirds of
the people of the United States who
were in favor of free and unlimited coin
age of silver, and an admitted majority
in the senate were shocked at every turn
by the executive and the secretary of
the treasury. He proposed to vote
against the conference bill because he
preferred the law as it now stood.
Sherman Defends the Report
Sherman defended and explained the
conference report. The question had
arisen in the conference committee, he
said, whether the two houses could be
brought to an agreement on the two
bills passed by them respectively. In
the first section of the conference bill
the language of the first section of the
house bill had been retained somewhat
but the amount of silver to be purchased
had been increased. Much to his regret
it had been fixed at larger amount thar
the entire American product of silver
1t had been made mandatory, not per-
missive, on the secretary of the treasury
to buy four and half million ounces O.
silver each month, which at the rate O.
$1.29 an ounce Cor sixteen to one) woulC
amount to a yearly issue of about
$70,00O,000 in treasury notes. The
legal tender clauses in the house bill
and in the senate bill had beer
somewhat different and somewhat
alike also, and the question
had come up in conference whether il
would be right to deprive the citizens O.
the United States of the right to con
tract for their payment in gold or any
thing else. 1t had, therefore, been
agreed unanimously that the treasury
notes to be issued for silver, like the
silver dollar on which they were based
should be legal tender for all debts
public and private, unless where other
wise stipulated in a contract. That
same clause was to be found in the
Bland bill.
Stewart Interpellates.
Stewart-Does the senator from Ohio
think here is any danger of the secre
tary OF the treasury failing to buy foul
and a half million ounces of silver PEI
month, if he can get it at less than par
as provided in the act?
Sherman-Not the slightest. Tht
senate cannot legislate on the idea tina
an officer of the government will no
execute the law. A suggestion has beer
made about the president and secretary
haunting the capital in regard to thu
bill. l have not seen either of them
and I do not think a single conferee ha
seen either Of them during the confer
ence. The president of the Unitet
States will do what he thinks is hi
bounden duty to do under his obligation
AS to his seeking to influence me or my
seeking to influence him, that is rathe
b beyond the bounds of reason.
voorhees, Expostulates.
Voorhees, said the trouble about thu
conference bill was not whether the sec.
retary OF the treasury would obey tn,
law, but that every single section of the
bill gave discretion to the secretary o
the treasury, who was packed agains
silver. Every single section of the bill
conferred, and was intended to confer
discretion on the secretary of the treas
ury by which he could destroy, dishono