Mexico weekly ledger., 1895-05-30

confidence among the holders OF its obligations,
and preserve the stability and value OF the va
people; but the present and future are far more
important than the past, and my time can be
discussing the questions now pending than in
reviewing transactions already closed
THE SILVER QUESTION.
Watcher We shall continue to preserve our
existing monetary system, under when az sne
paper, possess equal purchasing power In the
markets, or provide by law for the free and
t12n grains OF standard silver, and make them
the units and measures OF value in the e8-
change OF commodities and in the payment of
det:s, is by far the most important question
that has been presented for the consideration
of the American people during this generation;
coinage OF silver and the substitution of a new
unit and measure of value for the existing one
In the business transactions of the country is
not an ordinary experiment which can be safe
ly tried to-day and abandoned Tomorrow If
found Injurious, because the immediate conse-
quences of such a step would be SO far-reachtng
and so enduring that they would continue to
be felt for years after the policy had been re-
versed. 1t is incumbent, therefore, upon those
who insist upon the adoption of this revolu-
ttonary policy to show plainly and conclusively
In advance not only that It would result in no
fetal, for II not positively beneficial the change
would at least be wholly useless. This can not
be done by appeals to the excited passions and
preiudices of the people, by attempts to array
one class Of our citizens or one section OF our
country against another or by loose aud cN-
travagant unsupported by facts
and reasons. Tit questions involved are TOO
serious, the interests to be affected are too
large and the common sense of the people Is
too strong to Justify or even excuse this course
OF treatment.
The allegation, even il it we're true, that q
1873, or at any other time, does not prove, or
even conduce to prove, that the free coinage OF
silver at the ratio of 10 to l would be beneficial
to the country under the conditions now exist
ing. But, gentlemen, is 1t not true that the act
of February ~, 1873, which made the gold dol
lar the unit of value and dropped the standard
silver dollar from the coinage, was passed by
stealth. or that It's purpose or effect was to de-
prlye the people of the use Of any coin then In
use or then in existence in this country. That
bill was pending in congress for nearly three
years and was under consideration during five
sessions of that body; 1t was dintinctly recon-
mended in two reports OF the secretary OF the
treasury, and the director of the mint, and it
was officially printed and laid on the desks
of members of the house and of the senate
thirteen different times before the final vote
was taken on 1t. II was read at length in the
open senate several times, and in the house at
least once, as shown by the record: it was re-
ported from committees seven times, and the
discussion upon 1t in the house fills sixty-sl&
columns of the Congressional Globe" and In
the senate seVenty-eight columns. AS first re-
ported to the senate and passed by that body
In January, 1871. the bilf did not provide for
the coinage of any silver dollar whatever, but
expressly limited the coinage OF that metal to
subsidiary Observation-Disclosures, quarters and
dimes. In this form, without any provision
for the coinage of any kind of silver dollar, the
bill was passed in the senate on the lUIh day or
January, 1871, upon the call OF the yeas and
nays, and the record shows that the stwo
senators from Kentucky, Hon. Garrett Davis
and Hon. Thomas G. McCreery. the dis
tiugutshed democratic senator from Ohio, Hon.
Allen G.. Thurman, the present senator from
Nevada, Hon. William NJ. Stewart, together
with ali the other senators from the Pacific
slope, voted in the affirmative, while Senator
Sherman, senator Morrill, and twelve others
voted In the negative The reason given by
Mr.. Sherman for voting against the bill was
that the senate had, in obedience to the de-
mands OF the senators from the Pacific coast
so amended the bill, after it was reported from
the committee, as to abolish the charge OF one
fifth of one per cent. for coming gold, thus
making the coinage of that metal entirely free
The bill went to the house OF representatives
but il was not disposed OF during that congress
and at the first session of the next congress
Mr.. Kelley. of Pennsylvania, introduced IL IL
the house, and it was referred to a committee
THE CRIME OF 1873.
So far as the coinage of the silver dollar wa:
affected, the bill introduced by him was pre-
cisely the same as the one that had passed tbs
senate-that is, 1t made no provision for sucl
a coin. However, when the bill was finally re-
ported back from the committee to the house
It was so amended as to provide for the coinagt
of a subsidiary piece, TO be called a dollar, an(
to contain 3S4 grains OF standard silver, thu
same as the French 5-franc piece, and 1t was Il
be a legal tender to the extent of 50, and NJ
more. In this form 1t passed the house by
very large majority-in fact the opposition u
it was so weak that the yeas and nays wer,
not even called. The senate struck out thu
5-franc subsidiary dollar and substituted TO
doiiar, Sontainins 40 grains of standard silver
and provided that it should be q legal tende
to the amount of s., and no more. \ commit
tee of conference was appointed, the senata
amendment was agreed to, and the bill becam'
the 18th day Of February, 1873. This brief his
torical statement of the proceedings, which
fully sustained by the official record, show
that it was well understood in congress tina
the old standard silver dollar of 4i2h grain
was not to be thereafter coined at our minis
and that the only difference OF opinion tina
ara- nviEfad pvan tpmn arJ1v hatwppn tn
senate and house was whether they would SUB
stitute In its place a subsidiary coin contain
ing 3s4 grains, or a subsidiary coin contatnin
426 grains of silver. No proposition was mad
in either body to continue the coinage OF tn
, old dollar, or to make any silver coin the uni
of value'or a full legal tender in the payment
: The plain truth is that this act of 1878. whic
I" has been the subject of SO much misapprehen
> sion and denunciation, was simply q legal rec
/. | IGNITION of u monetary condition which ha
= existed in fact in this country for about thirty
:, five years, or ever since a short time after tn
= passage of the coinage act of 1884. From abou
the year 1888 until after the passage OF tn
, Bland-Allison act In 1873 no silver dollars wer
! in circulation in this country, and our who'll
/, currency consisted of gold coin and bank note!
lation, outside of California and its neighboI
+, ing territory, was all paper. There was durln
2 the latter period about S25,O00,OD in gold !
Z circulation on the Pacific coast, and the Unite
, States was collecting customs dues in gold an
/. using it in the payment of interest on the put
. lie debt, but there was no silver in circuiatio
a anywhere in this country not even the Ugh
weight subsidiary coins.
The value OF the United States note {
i greenback was always measured by gold an
Il price and q paper price, but never a Stly'
price, because silver, except the half-dollar
quarters and dimes coined under the act
1853. had been out OF use here for more tha
s twenty years before the commencement of Il
"a been in use for eleven years prior TO 1873.
e, OUR FIRST INA LAW.
Our first coinage law was passed in 1892, al
J. it provided for full legal-tender gold and slly
n coins at the ratio of Is to /; that is to sa
y IS pounds OF silver were to be considered
y equal in value to l pound of gold, and D
sT weights of the coins were adjusted to tn
81 rule. In deciding upon this ratio, neither N
10 Hamilton, who recommended It, nor the co
D. gress which adopted it, supposed they we
q arbitrarily establishing the relative values
10 the two metals, for no legislative authorf
u could do that, but it was supposed that tn
= were simply adopting and utilizing in t
er statute law the existing intrinsic or CONNIE
le cfal ratio between them. A brief experient
~ however, showed that a mistake had be
a made. and the inevitable result followed.
an soon became evident that Is pounds of silly
lc were not in fact equal in value TO one pound
Ve gold, and that no matter what words we
n printed on the statute book the people in t
n. transaction of their business wholly dfsl
az aarded the legal ratio and treated the nett
al according to their relative commercial vai'
r gold for Is pounds of silver, either In coin
ne bullion, nor use gold coins as money when I
ry market more than the coin itself.
"a! In short, silver had been overvalued a
nd gold had been .undervalued in the law, and I
'te Consequence was that by the year lsl2 gold 3
IN disappeared from the country, and from u
time on, until after the passage Of the act
n. 1884, the United States had practically sill
nc monometailism. In May, 1903, President J
ferson stopped the coinage of the silver doll
OF and during o period Of thirty-one years the
o. after not q single standard silver dollar v
ny ccined at the mtnts of the United States; b
go under the act of 1872, the subsidiary coins w
he fuli weight as compared with the dollar. q
Ell ware legal tender. and these coins, with Sp;
ish dollars, French crowns, or 5-franc piec
and bank notes constituted our circulat
| a medium. Gold having disappeared from c
We c~ulatIon, congress determined, In 1884, to br
~, 10 back by changing the ratio. The act OF y
III supplemented by the act Of 1887, provided Z
tho legal ratio should be 10 to !; that is, q
10 i'd pounds Of silver Ia the coins should be eq
or. 20 pound Of gold In the coins, and the eff
les Of this was to drive silver out Of circulat
Lhs and substitute gold Units place, because sill
%. was undepvalued and gold was overvalued
he the statute. One pound of gold, coined or
Ire coined, was not, In fact. worth intrfnsically