The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-09-04
SUMMARY OF THE DEBATE.

Chicago, Aug. 7.-Messrs. Horn and
Harvey, who recently engaged in long
debate on the advisability Of the United
States taking action on the silver ques-
ton. regardless of the position Of Eng
land, Germany or Dahomey, have pre-
pared summaries of the debate which
have been filed with the judges. The
arguments which mark the close OF the
10 days talk are as follows:
SUMMARY BY ROSWELL G. HORR.
The object Of the debate, says Mr.. Horr.
was to determine if it would be wise for
our nation to throw open it's minis to the
free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to
l when the civilized nations Of the world
refuse to join in such action. My oppon-
ent proposed to prove that such course is
advisable, and undertook to do it on the
lines laid down in Coins Financial
School,
l denied the ACCESSIBILITY Of such action,
and attacked the teachings Of that book
from the title page to the close. The de-
bate is finished, and how does the case
stand?
Mr.. Harvey admits that the book is
pure fiction He repudiates it's motto by
declaring that it does not mean what it
says. His statement that primary money
only is the measure of value he has not
even attempted to sustain, though his
proof has been called for repeatedly. His
statement that the people OF me Eff
tenth and Sixteenth centuries were in
the most "degraded condition of serfdom
and slavery" on account of the lack of
metallic money, has been completely de-
molished.
He based his whole argument on the
proposition that the silver dollar was, in
1882, made the only unit or measure of
value l have shown conclusively that
our forefathers attempted to establish
bimetallism and provided for two units
Of value, one of gold and one of silver,
always naming gold first, and that up to
1884 the silver standard alone was used.
That, after that the gold standard came
into USE and that since the silver dollar
has never for a day been used as the
measure of values in the United States.
No nation has ever succeeded in actual
ly using two standards at the same time.
Mr.. Harvey next based his case upon
the assumption that the law of 1873 was
a crime, and stated it had it's origin in
corruption. He planted himself upon four
propositions to prove the case:
First-He claimed that the congress of
the United States was purchaSed; that
the passage of the bill was procured by
the money of capitalists of this and other
nations.
Secondly-He stated that the bill pass
ed both houses all right, and was chang
ed by some clerk in it's enrolment.
He next claimed that it was not chang
ed by a clerk but that the dirty work
was done in conference committee.
He then showed that none of his other
statements are true, but that the work
was done by passing Substitute bill"
He introduced no evidence in support
of either proposition, and he stands con-
victed of making every one of those
charges without any proof that would be
received in any ordinary court of JUS
tice.
If the congress of the United States
were bribed to pass a bad bill, then the
bill must have first passed in bad shape.
Now, if that be true, then there would
be no need of a clerk to do the dirty work.
If it were done by the enrolling clerk,
then it follows that congress passed the
bill as it ought to have been, and con-
sequently they could not have done what
he says they were brlbed to do: Again,
if congress passed the bill all right, and
the enrolling clerk enrolled it correctly,
then the bribery could apply only to
the members of the conference commit
tee.
All these villainies are abandoned when
he claims that the whole thing was &C
complished by means of substitute
bill"
He introduced no evidence in support
Of any one of those positions. Thus he
stands convicted by his own statements
of an effort to deceive the people.
I submit that such conflicting allega-
lions demonstrate beyond a question that
|, tod to
position in regard to the law of 1873 by
pure fiction and without calling to his aid
a single established fact. It is conclusive
that if he had proof of any one of his four
propositions, he never would have intro
duced the other three. It is useless, then.
to spend more words upon a matter
which is manifestly so absurd.
Mr.. Harvey's statement that free coin
age creates UNLIMITED demand" is not
true. because there can be an unlimited
demand for no human productions His
assertion that the option of the debtor to
nav in either metal causes the cheaper
metal to be used is true. But such OBJ
ton does not restore it's relative com
mercial value. On the contrary, it drives
the dearer metal out of use, just as it has
done in Mexico and other countries where
the cheaper metal is today the sole cur
rency, and is not increased in value one
iota.
Another QOCCTlI6 OI MI. harvey is ina T
hv the free coinage of silver in this coun-
try upon the old ratio of 16 to 1, the old
price of silver as compared with gold,
will be restored.
TT it will restore the value of silver, it
will not increase prices. He proposes to
raise prices by diminishing the value of
the unit with which prices are measured.
Both results cannot follow.
Mr.. Harvey fails entirely to prove that
the use of one metal as the measure of
value, is an experiment. History proves
that the use of a single standard is the
only way to secure a stable standard
measure of values and to maintain prac-
teal bimetallism. 1t is based on scien-
tific principles, and wherever attempts
have been made to use both, the cheaper
has always driven the dealer out of cir
culation, which has resulted in practical
ly monometallism, always leaving the
cheaper metal only in use.
The gold unit is not responsible for the
fall in prices. The prices Of labor and
property when taken together, have not
declined.
when brought about by natural causes,
benefits only the money lender. Such
cheapening of products benefits all who
consume what they do not produce.
Mr.. Harvey utterly failed to show fall
in the price of a single article which is
not fully accounted for by cheaper cost OF
production, improved transportation or
increased supply.
He bases his contention on the assump-
ton that gold has appreciated. AS gold
measures the values of commodities,
wages and land, so wages, land and COM
modities measures the value of gold.
Commodities have fallen per cent;
wages have increased SO per cent, and
lands have increased 80 per cent in value
cipoo 1880 when Mr. Harvey contends we