The San Francisco call., 1895-07-18
Real Issues of the Debate
Dodged by the New
York Editor.
"Co1N's THEORIES DIssECTED.
Instead of Stating Facts the Gold
Champion Assails His Oppo-
nent's' Theories.
rCopyright, 1898, by Azel F. Hatch.l

CHICAGO, Ill, July 1.-THE second
session of the Horr-Harvey silver debate
began at . o'clock in the auditorium of the
Illinois Club before the same limited au-
dience. Mr.. Horr began by quoting Hal
lam's middle ages" as authority to
prove the fallacy of Mr.. Harvey's state
ment in his book regarding the degeneracy
of the world commercially in the nine
teerth century as result of the deprecia-
tion of silver. He cited from Professor
James E. Thorold Rogers to refute state
ments made by Mr.. Harvey from his book,
that the price of wheat had fallen in that
period, and that the lot of the toiling
masses became more miserable with the
passage from the eighth to the fifteenth
century, as charged by Mr.. Harvey. Leber,
Nautilus and Hyndman were also quoted
in the contradiction of the silver cham
pion's fifteenth-century statements. He
concluded:
'Mr. Harvey and his free-silver friends
identify prosperity and the progress OF
man with the lot of feudal nobility of
Europe, and not with that of the toilers.
Later 1 shall show that in his treatment in
the present as in the past Mr.. Harvey
stands as the exponent of the rich and not
of the toilers, whose welfare should first be
considered by the legislation of the state. !"
Mr. Harvey replied that he volunteered
TO explain the preface to his book because
the gold-standard papers all over the
country and his friends from New York
and elsewhere had declared that it was a
forgery, and he did not intend to argue
with Mr.. Horr that the monetary commit
tee, from the report of which the quota
ton was made, did not know what it was
talking about. He declined to have his
mind diverted from the regular argu-
ment and logical arrangement of the
debate. He declared that the debate
so far had settled the questions as to
what was the money of legislation, what
was the unit of value as fixed by the franz
ers of the constitution in favor of his book.
The keynote which he wanted to sound
was that there was no good reason for de-
basing one of the metals when gold and
silver had been honest money for centu-
ries, when under free coinage laws and
equal treatment both had equal purchas-
ing power in their own right, and when
population and the demand on the money
market were growing every instant.
Mr.. Horr, to clinch this business which
he declared his opponent had introduced,
read from Professor Gunton's wealth
and Progress to show that there was
rise instead of fall in the price of wheat
in tie fifteenth century, and correspond
ing increase in the early part of the six
teenth century. The prices he quoted
showed that wheat had been steadily ad-
varcing instead of falling, as claimed by
his opponent. He resented Mr.. Harvey's
severe criticism of Judge Vincent for decid-
ing in his reparks yesterday the question
whether the trainers of the bill Of 1892 in
tended to estabIish..two measures of value.
He had noticed that when men got bit
ten with either the greenback money craze
or the free-silver craze they instantly be-
came egotistical and abusive of every one
who differed from them. Judge Vincent
had decided the question as submitted
to him by individuals as he honestly
believed was right, and was right,
but Mr.. Harvey had called him
dishonest. Mr.. Horr read from letter of
Mr.. Leach, for many years Director of the
Mint who took precisely the same view,
that the claim that the silver dollar was
the unit of value was inconsistent with
the bimetallic system. This decision was
exactly in accordance with the facts The
laws authorized gold dollar unit and
silver dollar unit, different from each other
an intrinsic value. That was the reason
the law of 1873 was proposed.
Mr.. Harvey, replying, declared that Mr..
Horr had admitted yesterday that the sill
yer dollar was the unit OF value, and the
record showed it; now he attempted to
twist something back into the discussion
in which he was to be believed as sayin g
one thing yesterday and something else to-
day. Mr.. Horr was accused of trying to
mix things by discussing bimetallism and
the relation OF silver and gold, which were
in the second chapter of the book. He
asserted that neither Mr.. Horr nor Judge
Vincent knew any more of bimetallism
than babe. He accused mis- opponent of
travelling on side tracks and neglecting 10
follow the agreed order of the discussion.
He then introduced discussion of de-
monetization of silver and the ''crime"
of 1873.
To understand how silver could be de-
monetized in this republic the reader
should know that we then had paper
money and that no silver or gold was in
circulation except in California. The same
situation existed in England following the
French war in 1916, when silver was
dropped from the mints there.
The conspiracy to demonetize silver was
regarded by those engaged in it as base
transaction, just as those who visit Wash
ington and other capitals, to accomplish
by legislation sugar trust or trust on
silver, books or anything else. The con-
spiracy originated in England.
1t was discovered that the demonetiza-
tion of silver by England had no effect on
the commercial parity of the two metals at
ratio fixed By France.
1t was therefore current that, in order to
break the commercial parity and substan-
tally depreciate silver, all of the great
governments would have to be included in
kha legislatinn r,eeded The s,1hiact xrar