Year: 1876

try. III my opinion, a good and safe
currency is the great indispensable
to insure prosperity in connection with
the preceding measures, and which
would be shorn of one-half their ad-
vantages to the community without it.
In commercial country paper cur
rency is absolutely necessary. 1t may
be made convertible; or, like our legal
tenders, non-convertible. If made
non-e convertible it must have limit,
and the government must stamp a
value on it the same as coin, and use
it for all purposes that coin is now
used. We, however, in accordance
with the principles adopted by all
other commercial countries, prefer a
convertible paper currency. Our ma
tional currency, made convertible,
with clause requiring the banks to
redeem the notes at par in the money
centres and thus keep them at equal
value throughout the country, is the
best currency now in existence. But
to make it more uniform and useful to
the community, it must not have an
arbitrary limit to be changed periodi-
cally by legislation; nor is it wise to
have an unlimited issue under sys-
tenn of free banking, as is claimed by
many, which would prove as destruc-
tive as free trade with foreign coun-
tries is Of our productive industry. 1t
would be attended with all the peri
odical fluctuations which have charac-
terized our country heretofore and
which have proved so destructive to
Investments when paper issues were
made too abundant, by the creation
of new banks in time of speculation
and high values with scarcely any
limit, which always has and always
will result in bringing about crises
which must end in prostrating bust
ness and running thousands.


We therefore propose issuing the
currency based on the assessed value
of the real and personal property of
the country, in the proportion of 81
in paper currency to $35 of the assess
ed value of the real and personal
property, and distribute said currency
among all the states and territories in
proportion to their wealth. This
would remove the objection Of an ar
bitrary limit, and also provide for an
expanding limit just in proportion as
wealth and business increases in
every part of the country. This
would give to the money centres their
proportion of currency in proportion
to their wealth (not population, as
many Of our congressional fnanciers
have proposed and would have, if they
could, but which would be most un-
just distribution, so far as commercial
interests are concerned,) and no in
justice would be done any section of
the country. This must be avoided
as far possible, because now that the
old bone of contention is removed in
the abolition of slavery, sectional in
terests may be the next bone to dis
tract the government. This would
require the banks to be located in all
parts of the country, not principally
in money centers as now, which would
be the case almost to the same extent
under free banking. 1t appears
strange that the representatives from
the west and south have not urged
this principle long ago-a fair distri-
button Of national currency.


With this scheme of issue and dis
tribution once established the people
never would permit it to be changed,
because it is just, and requires no
further disturbing legislation to un-
settle business. With such a scheme
there could be expansions beyond that
point. Charters would be issued to
the states in proportion to their wealth
as they are applied for. These ap-
plications could be registered at the
banking department. at Washington
and issued in rotation from the books.
When there is no expansion beyond
this point, there can no contraction
take place, and consequently business
/ and the issue of currency will move
on smoothly, increasing as business and
wealth and population without any
disturbing tendency whatever. Great
er security is also given in the invest
ment of capital in building, in manu-
factures, in the development of the
country, which could not be given
under any other system, because they