Year: 1876

Six months, in advance, 90
the labor of the country will come
/ down to forty cents per day. The la
Dor of the country is it's wealth and its
value is measured by its money. I
have passed sieepless nights fearing
that this Republican policy, under the
dicta'iOn of certain leaders of both
parties, might be carried ont under the
bill reported by the majority. Our
| condition would be far worse than it
was before the war, because then we
had silver with gold to use as money.
If you deprive the debtor class of that
now you will be doing them a great
act of injustice. If you countenancc
this act of repudiatien for the credit
Or class the people Withhold every one
of you TO a strict account for so doing.
GARFIELD's POSITION.


The speech of Gen. Garfield in the
debate on the silver question, pub
lished below should be read with care
full attention. Garfield advocates a
single instead of a double standard
thus demonetising one half the cur
rency of the world. to the manifest ad-
vantage of the few people who are the
creditors, and to the disadvantage of
the hundreds of thousands who are the
debtors. In view, therefore, of the
immensity of our debts-National,
State. Local and Individual-the at
tempt 10 make them payable in cur
rency from % to 40 per cent. dearer
than that in which they were contract
ed is one of the most monstrous at
tempts at spoilation known in the
history of finance. The gold single
standard movement was a conspiracy
of the great capitalist firms, headed by
the Rothchilds, to tax the whole world
for their own beuefit. The time is not
far distant when the indignation of
tho whole country will be aimed at
the Garfield school of Statesmen who
advocated this monstrous injustice to
to the debtor class of the world,


GARFIELD's SPEECH.


Mr.. Garfield, of Ohio. can hardly
conceive a situation in which the
House could be brought more directly
face to face with what seems to pre-
sent Oh the one hand public honor
and on the other the deepest public
Disgrace than the alternative PROPOSE
tions now presented to this House in
the report. Everything in the way of
controversy hinges upon the proposed
amendment of the gentleman from In
diana, Mr.. Landers.] 1t claimed that
by the terms of the act of 1869, it
would be lawful for us to pay the pup
lie debt in silver dollars such as might
have been coined under the law as it
stood in 1861. rs.1 Hv


Now desire to recall to the mind
of the House the letter and spirit of
that law. After all the doubt and the
| turbulent excitement about what the
actual obligation of the nation was in
regard to the public debt, the first act





dent Grant, made solemn declara-
ton designed to put all those doubts
to rest. 1t was declared by Congress
that e


The faith of the Unites. States is SOL
emnly pledged to the payment
In what? Not in silver, not in gold,
not in coin, but


in coiu or its equivalent Of all the OBJ
| legations of the United States not bear
ing interest, known as United States
notes, and of all the Interest bearing
obligations of the United States.
The declaration there was that the
payment of all these national obliga-
tons not specifically currency obliga-
tions was to be in g coin OF its equiv
alent." Now, what did Congress
mean? What were our laws before
1861? Why, Mr.. SPEAKER, since 1874
we have had one standard dollar;
| aud we have by law embodied it in
two metals, gold and silver. But all
the time, in order to have one stand
| ard, not two, we have sought to make
the coins of the two metals conform to
the one standard keeping the amount
of metal in one SO adjusted to the
amount of metal in the other that a
dollar of gold should be equivalent to
dollar in silver. Every hour that we
had double standard it was double
only on the ground of equivalency;
and when by reason of the shifting
value of the two metals in reference
to each other, the silver dollar and the
gold dollar have varied from each 9TH
er in value, Congress has undertaken
to cqualize them by increasing the
amount of metal in the other. We al
| ways sought to avoid the evil of hav-
ing two kinds of dollar, one worth
more than the other. And when Con-
gress promised to pay in coin it was a
promise to pay gold coin or silver
coin of equal value to the same nomi-
nal sum in gold. cannot believe that
this statement will be denied.


Congress saw few years ago that
it was going to be difficult to keep up
the equality or equivalency OF. the dol
lar III the two metals SO it dropped
one of the metals, except as subsidi-
airy coin, and left the national stand
ard Of value embodied in the other,
namely, in gold. Now, the fact that
in 1873 we adopted q device 10 pre-
serve the constancy of the value of the
dollar does not by any means signify
that we meant to change the old obli-
CATION SO that men to whom the Gov
ernment owes money can lawfully be
paid in money of different value.