New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1895-07-18
THE DEBATE on MONEY.
gcneracy.

Under the peculiar arrangements governing
the debate between Mr.. Horr and Mr.. Harvey. il
was hardly 10 he expected that the meat Of the
discussion could be reached at once. Each dis
putant naturally sought at the start TO make his
own position cear-to get rid Of some under
brush so to spcak-and TO take quick advantage
of any opening left by the other, so that much
time is naturally consumed at the outset in points
which do not reach the main issue. But Mr.
Horr was able to show at the first that with all
his Astounding humor, which makes him so at
tractivc. he is not merely an amusing speaker
as some have reported but is strongly equipped
for the serious argument His criticism of
Coins" persistent parading of distinguished
6nancicrs as defeated by him in argument was
well calculated to show the essential dishonesty
of an ''allcgory" which was intended to be mis-
understood by many readers.
Attacking Mr.. Harvey on his phrase. primary
money" Mr.. Horn was able in the first discus
sion TO bring ont the fact that Mr.. Harvey did
not know what he meant by his own pet phrase
and that the money OF redemption is not ncccs-
sarily nor always coin OF any kind, as it was
not in this country from 1862 to 1879 The whole
theory of the freecoinaSc men rests on notion
that insutiicency Of the money Of redemption.
which they assume must somehow be coin, rem
ders the disuse of silver source of peril and
cause of disaster. 1t all depends upon per
fcctly arbitrary and unwarrantcd definition OF
.primary money" or money Of redemption,
which Mr.. Horr began by effectively exposing.
II IS also apparent in Mr. Harveys share OF the
debate thus far that he Is in fact. as he seemed
in his book. incapable Of distinguishing between
proved truths and demonstrated fasclIoods. or
else relies upon reckless assertion and the isno-
rance Of readers to make one as effective rs the
other OF his twelve points laid down at the
outset almost every one has been repeatedly,
publicly and conclusivcly disproved. But either
Mr.. Harvey is incapable Of recognizing proof
when he sees II or he does not wish 10 confnc
himself 10 the truth. The assertion that 1.-The
act Of 1873 was surrcptiilously passed is one
which a man cannot make at this late day with
out arraigning himself for incapacity Of mind
or want OF integrity SO the assertions that the
silver dollar WAS the unit of value until 1913,
and that gold was measured in the silver dol
lar and that the option to pay In either metal
transferred the demand 10 the cheaper and re-
stored It's relative commercial value, involved
conflict with the fact that in 1873 and for years
before gold had been the cheaper metal ana
was not restored IN relative value.
But these and other assertions will be nuts
and cheese for the wcilarmed disputant who
has undertaken TO expose the untruths OF Coin
In their order. When the root Of the matter Is
reached, the assertion that the discontnuance
Of silver coinage "caused the fall In prices
which followed 1873, it Will probably be found
that Mr.. Harvey has never once considered the
meaning Of the word caused" and has clabo-
ratey shut his eye; to all the accumulated proof
that human products have been greatly cheap
cned by the increased efficiency OF human labor
In yesterdays contribution 10 the debate Mr.
1orr overwhelmed his opponent with authorl-
ties that disproved the assertions In the lat
ters mischevOus book concerning the cond-
ton Of the British yeomanry five hundred years
ago. The fifteenth century seems TO the simple
minded Harvey an epoch filled with IA thick
darkness, darkness that might be felt He
speaks Of it most distressfuly as portion Of
the DARK Agcs'-a phrase which used TO spook
In schoolboy essays, but never was applied 10
the fifteenth century-an1 against the array Of
authorities which Mr.. IIorr hurled at him he
introduced nothing else than a table compiled
by Adam Smith. 1t seems already to be obvious
that Mr. Harvcy's speeches are going to be mere
retcrations Of what he has already put forth.
But reiteraton Of falsities is neither argument