University of South Carolina Libraries
tbe talk of fraud Id the passage of tnis demonetization act, there had been only 8,000,000 of them ooined while the amount of gold was several hundred millions, aid Hon-: "Senator Morrill simply used the expression'There were noneooinel and Mr. Harvey draws tbe conclusion that because that is not accurately true, * be cannot tell the truth about anything elsa" He then went on: " Doctor Linderman gives the value of the silver dollar each year from 1834 to 187b In the Census Report. According to that table, at no time was the silver dollar between 1834 and 1878 worth less than 10U.J} cents, tne highest was in 1859 when in was worth 106.23. This "Coin" oalls a slignt variation." Lf Harvey then began the discussion of bif metallisin and said: "Scientific oimetaiism Is this: "1. Free and unlimited coinage of both gold and silver; these two metals to constitute the primary or redemption money of the government. "2. That silver dollars 01 0/1 >4 grams ui pure suver (with us) to be tue uult of value, aud gold to be coined into money ? at a ratio to be changed it necessary from time to time if the commercial parity to the legal ratio shall be affeoted by the action of foreign countries. "8. The money coined from both metals to be legal tender in the payment of ail debts. "4. The option as to whloh of the two moneys is to be paid in the liquidation of the debt to rest with the debtor, aud the government also to exerolse that option when desirable in paying out redemption money. "All of these conditions are necessary. Like any useful mechanical construction all the parts are necessary. First, as to unlimited coinage: When the mints are open to unlimited coinage of the two metals an unlimited demand is created for them. The quantity is limited. When these two metals seek a market they find a demand for their use in the arts and manufactures, which is limited. The surplus finds an unlimited market at the mints to be ouined into money, the objeot for whloh all other produots seek the market. They thus have an unlimited market, as the mints are open to all that oomes. It is a question of supply and de man a. "With a limited supply ana unlimited demand, what stops their value rising? It is this: The law says, 'We coin 871>i grains pure silver and 23.8 1 grains pure gold, respeo tlvely, into dollars, and confer upon these coins functions whioh make for them a permanent and equal demand.' When this is the law people will not take less for their silver and gold, the quantities above named, than a dollar in current money, for they have the right to have it oolned into dollars. "This unlimited demand lor the two metals eiisted in all the world at ratios one to the other up to 1811, when England closed her mints to silver. The demand thus made fixed the commercial value of the two metals at the ratio fixed by law. England closing her mints had praotically no effeot. It was designed to do so and was the beginning or tne movement Intended to limit the quantity of primary money to one of the metals and correspondingly decrease the value of the other metal. / "I now make a part of my remarks an official table taken from page 108 of oompiled laws and coinage statistics, an official document from Washington, showing the commercial ratio of the two metals for 2JO years, to whloh I have added tbo-oommoroial ratio for 1894. From this table it will be seen that under the effeot of unlimited coinage up to 1878 a parity between the two mecals was maintained at the legal ratio. Cast your eyes up and down these columns and see how , evenly the commercial ratio kept pace with the legal ratio. The ratio of France, the largest nation commercially during that period having a bimetallic ratio, wm the governing lnfluenoe, whloh wa9 15)4 to 1; ours was 15 to 1 till 1884, then 16 toL" The table showed that from 1687 to 1872, Inclusive, the ratio varied betwden 14 14 and 16.96, being It94 In 1687 and 15.63 In 1872. As prepared by Harvey the nee to ? 16.1U in 1878 and up to 82 56 In 1894 is marked "Demonetization." * Horr then took up the argument, saying: "All these inquiries about the valuation in the ratio of the past are of little account in this debate. This one fact 1 admitted by Coin and disputed by no one: All the civilised nations of the world have ceased the free coinage of silver upon any ratio. Silver today has no free coinage in any country where gold is the taDdard, and only in such countries as are using sliver as the unit and measure of value. It matters little how such a state of affairs has been established since it is the existing fact. Silver Is cheap. We both agree to that. "No coins which are of less value than the market values of the metals in them would indicate are ever treated as the measure of ultimate redemption, nor ever passed current at their tace value, 4 except they are redeemable in money which is worth as much coined as uncoined. Now 'Coin' in his 'Financial Bchool' really admits that the ratio between the two metals must always be determined by the actual value of the metals in the markets of the world, and ignores the doctrine of the ratio of 16 tol being possible at the present day. On page 111 'Coin' says: 'We express vulr ues in dollars, the unit of our monetary system. That unit is the gold dollar of ?3 2 grains of pure gold, or 2t>.8 grains of standard gold. If we were to cut this amount In two, and make 11.6 grains a unit or a dollar we would thereby double the value of all the property in the United States except debts.' "Is not that statement wisdom for you in chunks? What a head that boy must ? have. Precisely such another proposition would be: We measure cloth In this country, legally, with a yard stick thirty-six inches long. If we were to cut the yard I stick Id two and declare by law that eighteen Inches shall hereafter be a yard we would thereby double the amount of cloth in the United StateB. Holy Moses I What a philosopher we have here. Then cut it in two agaiu and the cloth would be quadrupled. If the boy had said that by cutting the gold dollar into two pieces end then ohangmg our unit or dollar so that It should be only half as valuable as it is now we would double the nominal value of all the property in the world, but would not affect its actual value in the least, he would have told the truth. "Before Mr. Harvey finishes his book he discloses what he really meant by bimetallism. We have it here in his own language, and it is in this book that I find the principles which I am called upon in this debate to combat. The author ays: 'The objection to Independent bimetallism Is that the parity between the two metals cannot be maintained at our ratio of 19 to 1, that is, the gold?-3 2 grains?in the gold dollar will be worth more than the silver?3V1J^ grains?in the silver dollar; we have twice changed the quantity of gold in the gold dollar, eaoh time making it less. If the commercial value of 23 2 grains of gold is worth more than the commercial value of 871^ grains of pure stiver then reduos to 2J grains, 21, 2u grains of less, if necessary, to put the two at a ratio where the practical effect of free coinage, when once set towoikmg again, will denionst.aie that the ra.lo is at its natural point and parity easily obtained.' "And then again on page 143 he says: 'with silver remonetizid a id a just and equitable standard ol values we can, if necessary by act of congress, reduce the number of grains in a gold dollar till it is of the same value as the silver dollar. We can legislate the premium out of gold.' Now then, what becomes of his ratio of 11 to 1?" Harvey's reply was as follows: "Mr. Horr alludes to something that I have said before and then adds, 'Cut the yard stick half in two and it will make twice as many yards of cloth in ihe world.' Now, Mr. Horr, let me tell you what you people did in lb73. You doubled the length of the yard stick. For instance, let me illustrate It. Suppose one-half of the gold in the world were destroyed today beyond recovery, would not the gold dollars that were left bo twice as valuable as they were befor. ? Mr. Horr is not a bad pupil and shakes his head. Lot me Illustrate It la another way that every farmer in this country will understand. Suppose that one-half of the wheat In the world today were destroyed beyond recovery. Mr. Horr, would not wheat on the Chicago market tomorrow be about double in value what it is today? You cannot escape that proposition, and It does not require a man to be a farmer to understand the Illustration and any man who is a business man will understand the gold Illustration. "So that when you destroyed one-half the redemption money in 187a you doubled the value of the money that was left. You doubled the yard stick. You can see no harm In destroying the price of a man's property, cutting the price of his property half In two; you shut your eyes to that. But your eyes are wide open When any man proposes to even up with you In your cuttlug-ln-half process by proposing to cut the gold dollar half In two. We don't wish to do either. We wish to put back in the coinage system the money that you demonetized in 1878 " Then referring to the table of ratios from 1687 to 1894 be said the whole of the variation of said ratio When "the world practically had bimetallism" was made Dy me cost ui ?euoii)jv. "It 1b possible," said Horr, In reply, "that my friend Hervey believes It when he says the act of 1873 cut the price of the property of the world In two, and that prloes Immediately, as they must have done If their statement is true, dropped fifty per cent. You destroy one-half th6 wheat in the world and the chances are that you will increase the value of wheat probably four times?such is the estimate of political economists; but wheat is an artiole that people eat to live, it is all consumed from year to year, or after a short time. Gold has been accumulating for ages, and If you should destroy the primary money quality of half the gold in the world you would not ohange the prioe of the metal one-half. As soon as the price would go up there is an enormous store laid away all over the entire world that is not being used for money purposes, that would at onoe seek the channels and he coined Into inoiier and take the Dlaoe of tbe money that had been destroyed. "What 'Coin' is really after is a cheap dollar. He would reduce at one stroke, if need be, the value of the money unit of this country one-half. If that is not adopting a 60-cent dollar what is it? How I am here to protest against the whole scheme because it is an effort to cheapen labor. I care not in what part of the world you seek for examples you will find that civilization is the highest where the best wages are paid for human effort, both mental and physical. The real measure of values is human toll. To decide whether any system of flnanoea is best you must inquire into its effeot upon the tolling millions. The greatest commodity ever plaoed on the markets of the world is labor. To know whether gold has appreciated or depredated In real value the prloe paid for any human effort must never be omitted. When the laws of nature through mechanical devloes are compelled to do the work formerly done by human hands, three results should follow: The product should be cheapened for the oonsr ners of the world, the wages of the men who still labor In that production should e increased, and the profits of the promoter of the enterprise, or the inventor of the improvement, should become greater " Harvey rejoined: "Mr. Horr, we do not intend to let you before the American people cloak yourself behind the laboring man. There have been free schools in this country for many years, and you are not going to fool the laboring men of this country. Mr. Horr asks me nbout prices, why they did not drop suddenly 50 per cent, in 1473 when silver was demonetized. Tho reply to that is this: We wore not then on a specie basis. We began again In 1879; the demand for gold was not thrown on it to answer tho entire purpose ui primary niuuey niibii ion, uuu micu iu was cushioned in this country by the disputed position of silver. "He says my illustration about half the gold being destroyed Is not like the wheat if one-half of that wore suddenly destroyed. In thi9 whole argument you can apply one safe principle, and that is that sunply and demand regulate values." Referring to the table of ratios again Harvev said that for 200 years there was a practical parity between the two motals. Said Horr, when Harvey sat down: "My friend Harvey says that he is not going to permit me to stand behind the laboring men, or hide behind them, or words to that effect. How are you going to stop me from standing where I have a mind to? 1 say 1 oppose this whole scheme because it will Injure every man who lives upon wages in the United States." Horr then went Into a dissertation on the origin of value, his conclusion being that when gold and silver were first used to effect exchanges the oost in human labor of producing them measured their values. The xneu who advocated free silver left "out oi the quesiion the great human product of labor and the manner in whicn it will be affected by the legislation kot- ?ko? ?\fnnnjo Thai n vc hnl a nl>in VUOV VII|/tU|?V0Vi AMW? r seems to be to enable people who have run Into debt to pay their debts without returning full value for what they have received." But, said Horr, the oredltors of the country outnumbered the debtors five to one. Every man who had worked one hour of hl9 day's work was a creditor. Harvey would not take up this subject yet, but would prove when he got to It, he said, that Horr was wrong about the creditors outnumbering the debtors. He proceeded to show when Germany and France demonetized silver, In 1873 and 1874 he said, and called attention to the table of ratios to show that it was just then that the price of silver began to fall, his conclusions being that for 200 years under bimetallism there was parity and In 22 years under the gold standard total destruction of parity. Another table wag here produced showing the annual price at London of silver from 1833 to 1891 and the period from 1873 to 1864 when silver fell so greatly was marxed on tne table "Demonetiz ition." "We have relatively now only half as much prim iry money in existence as in 1873 and o; course silver Is only worth half as much." He tnen asked: Has sliver deolined since 1873 by reason of overproduction? and presented a table g.vmg the production of both metals eacn year or per.od of years from 1545 to 1891 in kilos, the ratio of gold to silver in weight and In value. From this he argued that: "The varying supply of the two m.-tals prior to 1873 never h id any efleot In changing their commercial parity from the legal ratio fixed." Horr said: "Brotner Harvey omits this one important thing. You may make two standards by law, but the peo pie will discard one and use the other. We ne'cessari y are compelled to do business with oue or the otner unless the value happens to be precisely the same, bo that the measure becomes one and i identical." 1 Harvey referred to the table of produc- ' tlon of gold and silver to prove that in ' the time it covers, 8i'8 years, the ratio 1 between the quautlty or the two metals ' produced fluctuated from 66 to 1 to 4 to 1, 1 while the "commercial ratio hung tenaci- 1 ously to the legal ratio " < Horr declared that gold had depreciated 1 In vaiue?5>per cent in less than 100 1 years. "How do I know mat gold is cheaper than It was in 1873? I wul tell 1 you. The rate of wages, the amount of 1 gold that a man can get for a certain ( number of hours' work, tells me whether j gold has decreased In prion or not. I can get today twice as much gold for a day's 1 work following the plow as I did lu 1849? Wages are 70 per cent higher, paid in gold, for the same amount of work than 1 in 1860. Has not gold depredated then when you measure it with the great commodity of human toil?" Harvey replied: "Mr. Horr says that ] everything has been cheapened, includ- i ing gold. To say that gold and products i cheapen simultaneously is a financial j contradiction. You buy gold by exohaug- < ing other property for it. When it cakes < more property to buy gold than for- i merly, gold has risen. I "Witn us now the price of services or < property means the gold dollar or its ' equivalent. Price has a definite mean- ( ing. It is gold that property and labor is being price in, it is not priced in labor, I and the average human intellect will 1 have to be re ced a little lower than It is. i now, before Mr. Horr oan toll the people ' out on a limb and chop the Uinb off and ' mangle them any more than they are < now mangled. He Is trying to lead you 1 off on a theory that has no practical ap ] plication as a monetary unit." t SIXTH DAY. ; The sixth session of the money debate began with H irvcy on the fl tor, an I he 1 proceeded to make a statement reviewing 1 from his standpoint the value of the fl'lih : day's debate. He claimed that cvorv material proposition he was contending for ' had been strengthened by what h id been brought out. Horr then proceeded with ' the discussion. He said: "On yesterday 1 Mr. Harvey stated that I had found but 1 one error in the statements in his ' book, and he defied me to call attention to any other mistake that he had made. The mistakes that ure made in Mr. Harvey's book are, many of them, not mis- ' takes as to the words that he uses, but ' misleading inferences from positions which he takes, I will now in my opening remarks call some attention to what i I mean. In your book, Mr. Harvey, you ' say: 'It is estimated by all men of judg- ] ment who have given practical attention ' to mining that the silver now in existence < has cost not less than & per ounce, and 1 many put it much higher.' You will find 1 that in 'Coin's' book, page 71 I assert ' that silver has not cost that much for l production because, 6ilver has been constantly increasing in production at a low i price, running from $1.20 an ounce down to &7 cents an ounce, and the people of the world never keep constantly producing an article at so much less than it < costs them to produce it." Horr said that if "Coin" was correct ; the silver men in three years lost $238,- ' 000,000. He didn't believe that men would continue at a business in which < they lost nearly $80,000,000 a year. He then proceed.-d: "Again, Mr. Harv.-y i says on page 89 of his book: 'There is in 1 the world now, according to the report of the director of our mint, $3,727,018,889 in i gold una ozj.oi i,o-?u in suver. aiio i mint director didn't give that as the amount of silver and gold in the world at all. The director of the mint gave simply the amount of coin supposed to be then in existence. Mulhall, whom you refer to as good authority, gives the stock of gold coin and bullion in 189J at six thousand million dollars, and the amount of silver at about six thousand million ' dollars. i "Coin tells us on page 63: 'We havi in the United States in round figure fl,6D0,- i 000,U00 of all kinds .of money.' The dt,a- ( tistical Abstract of the United States i page SO, says; 'The total amount is t2,- < 420,000,000.' That gives one amount, you give another. You tell us, page 63: 'We ; are paying England UK),000,000 annually in gold in the payment of interest on our , bonds, national and private bonds owned i by her people.' 1 deny it and dety any prooi that will show that we owe all Che countries of Europe Comuined that much; that is, bonds that would require that < much ot interest to be sent abroad. You 6tate that the indebtedness of the United States is forty thuusand million dollars; that is, tho people of this country, if that , be true, owe nearly two-thirds as much as all the property la the United States is worth. 1 brand such a statement simply as ialse." Harvey on taking the floor again said he Would prove in the proper place that silvor cost what he said it cost and foreshudowed that he was going to count in its cost all that had ever been spent prospecting or digging for it, whether profitably or not. Replying to Horr's comments as to the quantity of gold and silver iu the world he said: "When he refers to the amount of gold and silver In the world he omits to say that my statistics gave the amount of gold and silver , available for use as money. Its quantity ior use as money is me suujeot we are interested in." He then produced a table showing the world's production of gold , and silver for each year from 1840 to 1892, and for groups of years inoiudlng the period from 1794 to 1848 inclusive. The grand totul was, gold, $5,683.210,000; silver (coining value) $5,977,5:29,000. It showed that the silver produced in 187:2 was (coining value) $05,1259,000; that in 1878 it was $81,800,000, and that, generally increasing each year, it went on until the production for 1892 was $196,459,009. The figures are for the whole world, and are official. The argument Harvey made on this table was; "Here we see that from 1793 to 1800 there was $3 25 in silver produced to $1 in gold, or a quantity ratio?ounce for ounce?of about fifty of silver to one , of sold. And yet there was no fluotua= fcion or the commercial with the legal ratio. For 828 years prior to 1873, as ;ar back as we have statitica that are undisputed, the change in the relative quantity of relative production had no effoot ju their relative commercial value. But in twenty-two years demonetization has revolutionized the metallio currency of the world." Harvey then challenged Horr to assign any other reason than overproduction for the break In the commercial parity of the two metals. Referring to "scientlflo bimetallism" he recapitulated his statement of the fifth session, and added: "Excepting in the unit, there should be no discrimination between the two metals as they stand before the law. The right to make a contract to be liquidated in any specific property should not apply to money. All such contracts, when made payable in money, should call for 'lawful money.' To permit a raid to be made upon either gold or silver is to permit individuals or combinations of men to dictate to tho government what should be legal tender money. The government Is the creator of money, and the crearor should regulate that which it creates. To make debts payable In one to the exclusion of the other is to make a greater demand for the one and to discredit the other; it is giving the individual a right to promote his selfish interests at the expense of the common good; to interfere with that which the law creates for the benefit of socieiy " Horr, in reply, resumed his comments on the "school." He said: "While discussing your visionary 'law of unlimited demand for sliver by free coinage,' on pages 47 and 48 of your book, you make Mr. John R Walsh, whom you represent as present in your school whloh never existed, ask 'How can the government by passiDg a law add a cent to tho commercial vaiuo of any commodity?' You answer: 'Suppose,' said Coin, 'that oongress should pass a law tomorrow authorizing the purchase by the government of 100,000 horses, cavalry hor?-s, .M.-uiln sizes ana qualities. Ana tne governnienjntered the market to git these horses. Horses should advance in vnln*>. Not cnly the kind of horses desire 1 but also ether horses upon which there would be % demand to take the place of horses sold to the government. The government can sreate a demand for a commodity.' Now that answer has misled thousands of honist and unthinking p>ople. ' You used this illustration to teach that, free coinage would create an unLiii.i:Hit demand for silver and Increase Irs value in the markets of the world. The horses would be bought, kept, and use I by the govern inent; and the price of them would be paid to those who sold them, In money. Under such coinage as pou advocate silver wool I b> received by the government, coined, und then, in ifleet, returned to the owner again. He might not get the same dollars made from the identical silver which he took to the mint, but he would get those coined from silver received and treated procisoly us his was. so that he would practically get back the same thing. The only honest connection possible between your illustration and the truth would depend upon the government's branding each horse and returning him, or another horse of the same class which had been treated and branded in the same a ay, to the man who presented the horse for branding. Now, what influence would that have ou the price of tne horse.-.? It would not increase the consumption nor would it affect the supply. "Another item: The average prise of wheat, as given on pagiDS of 'Coin's School,' was Si cents in 1891. The Statistical Acstract gives the New York price $1 U9 in 1891, and the average price in Chicago in 1891 was 97 cents. If you are tocciing the people the truth, explain this discrepancy. Again: In 1893, you Btate. the corn crop of Illinois was 16J,300,0J0, which you teach to tiie people governed the price of corn in the United States that year, whereus the product of corn that year in the United States was urn .jui . ifi/1 VT?.? h .. . T irr.. r l,uiy,wv,'AA; ui uusuoio. i.iun rvuuv* *t i??u Is, Brother Harvey, that you should tell us how that little tail in Illinois corn crop wagged the whole dog in the United States, in another portion of your boon you state, at leust by implication, that the farmer's products wi.l not buy as much of all kinds of cam modifies, except labor, as iu 1873 You do this 011 pages 121 and 122 of Coin's School. That statement is misleading and untrue. The fanners' products taken as a whole will buy as many things thAt the farmers need and use as the same product*, all taken together, would have bougat In 1873 " In reply Harvey said: "When he calle I your attention to the illustration in the 'School" of the government eniering the market for horses Air. Horr should havo thought how the government fixes the price on gold. You take a certain quantity of gold to the United States mint and it is coined and given buctt to you in so much money. The price of gold as money is fixed. Now, we ask the same thing for silver, that's all. Now 1 proceed with the argument of want is scientific bimetallism. The option of the debtor to pay in either metal is a vital fjrinciple. Unlimited free coinage at the mints guarantees a substantial parity. But if, by reason of supply or a corner 011 one of the metals or from any other roaBon one of the metals is enhanced in value, the debtor exercises his option to pay in the other metul and thU transfers the demand from the dearer metal to the cheaper metal." Hero Harvey quoted the Chioago Tribune 01 January, 1878, in which an editorial takes direct ground against a single Btundard for the reason that the debtor should be provided with an option as explained by Harvey. Harvey enuiniraiel two kinds of money in use?one was "primary," the other "representative." Primary money was the measure of values. He proceeded: "When we have gold as real money, as we have now, our representative money is tied to it as the tall of a kite is fastened to a kite. We make it as good as gold only by fastening it to gold. Henoe we now hear of a 5) cent silver dollar. Why? Because silver is being measured in gold, and so is all your property. We have 5J-cent wneat and 6-cent cotton, and this relutlve decline is the saine with all other property where its value is measured in the goid markets of Che world, not affected oy trust causes or a new use that has increased its demand. What reduced the prices was taking away one-half the real inouey. W.iat will put it back is to re store that half of the money, bear In mind one thing through this whole argument: that supply and demand regulate the value of money, the same as of all other property." Horr proceeded "to take up the question as to why the people of the civilized world refuse to adopt Mr. Harvey's plan. I a^mit it, that the nations that drsc demonetized silver did so because they considered the mineral unstable, variable in price, and that afterwards the element of cheapness came in. The nations which acted later did It teoause silver was cheapening all the tlm>, as an additional rea son. "In your book and yesterday In every statement you made you used the term thut it 'the mints of the world' woud give free and unlimited coinage to silver on a certain ratio, it could be maintained. I have not denied that. The question we are discussing is after the entire civilized world has recused to use silver as money ot final redemption, and still refuses tc use it, can the United States single' banded and alone afford to put itself upon a silver basis?" Horr then adopted in his remarks "Coin's" table of the gold and silver production of the world, but only that part from 1S74 to 1892 inclusive, and with the mint report of the production for 181)3 and 1891 added, showing a pretty steady increase oi production of gold and a production of silver (coining value) of $71.d)J,0JJ in 1874, increasing steadily Co $214,381,000 in 1894. The gold production begins at (90,76 '.000 in 1S74 and rises to 1181,510,000 in 1894. Horr remarked: "Now this table shows that since 1674 the production ol silver ha9 beon constantly on the increase. Gold has increased since 1873 from $90, 750,0U0 worth in one year to $181,510,000? just auouc double. Silver in those same yi-ara has increased from 171,500,000 up tc 8^14,381,000. While gold increased onij twice, silver has increased just about three times." Harvey began on taking the floor again by stating that all our forms ot monej have their value fixed by gold, and lc repiy to a question Horr said: "That It right," and Harvey proceeded: "Papei and token money, representing gold, d( not affect the value of gold or property, except in the sense of faclllatlng ex change. They are eaoh a medium of ex ohange but not a measure of value' Then was no paper money In circulation lc California between 1850 and 1873, and Tory little between 1873 and 1880. Anc yet between these years, ?old and sllvei prices were as high in California as they were with us. Mexico has no pnpei money, and yet wheat is worth there |1.3D per bushel In silvir. and the equiv ilent of our gold pric? for who it here, where we have paper money represent ing gold. "Any one who denies the proposition that primary or real money alone la the measure of values is usked to considei this: With relative production of silvei to gold since 1373 not accounting for the decline In silver since that year, why is it that silver is worth only 50 cents now as compared with 100 oonts in '873? And, If a change of our money measure to the gold standard has reduced the price ol silver 50 per cent., what reason Is there that it would not exert a similar influence on other property?" Horr's rejoinder was: "Any business man will only need to look at the table of production of silver and gold since 1873 to be able to ascertain that the law whict I partially illustrated yesterday operates I in reference to silver as well as in reference to every other commodity. It id cheaper because the demand and the sup| ply are in such relations to euch other that it makes It cheaper, just as wheat has boon cheaper, and for the same reason. "Prices are not governed or controlled by the amount of primary money in any country or in the whole world, so far as ] know. Why, when we passed the lav of 1873 there was at that time only aboul one hundred thirty-five millions of gold in the country?all the primary money we had. I. his doctrine is true prices should have been doubled Instantly. Ah, but bore Is the trouble with your matbe matics. If your doctrine is true every product In this country should have been reduced In price by this cheapening ol silver." narvey saiu: ouver is uuv uun |?i mary money," and Horr went on: "Sil yer is not primary money, and under bit doctrine, because primary money has beer reduced in that way one-half, all pricei should be reduced one*h ?lf. Have thej been? Has corn depreciated that way! Has pork depreciated? Has cattle de predated that way? Over one-hall of the farm products of th< United States are as high now as the; were in 1873, a faot which could not b< true if his uoctrlne as to the appreciatloc of the measure of value Is true; price! would necessarily be split in two. Nov the difficulty is, articles are cheapened bj the processes of production. The price ol an article is always fixed by the absoluti cost of production?to the concern pro ducing It, which does it at the highest price at which it can stay in the busines! after the price is fixed. "For instance, we had been paying years ago $1 a pound, and a good dea more, for aluminium. It used to cosi that in actual work in expeuse to get i pound of it. Now aluminium is without limit in the crust of the earth almost, it used to cost so much to separate it that il was worth more than gold. Now wt have been cheapening the production ol aluminium until it is down to perhaps 40 or 43 cents a pound. Now mat k?when some person (and it will be doue) shall discover a method of reducing aiuiuln< inm so that it can be made for 10 cents a pound the price of aluminium will not go down to Id cents a pound at first, or anywhere near it. The man making the discovery will hold the prioe up as high as he can keep It, and that is always at the highest point that it co9ts any of the men who still stay in the business U make it." In rep?y Harvey said he would fullj debate thl9 question later "In its prnpei place," but "just give you this to thinb about meantime: Between 1850 and )87c we had a groat ora of improved facilities. Even tho harvesters were all invented and in use before 1373, and yet prices were rising. Improved facilities Increased constantly and at the same time prices were rising. If 371% grains of silver is now only worth 5o cents why Is not the gold in the gold dollar only worth 50 cents, if you are right about your cheap cost of production. "In 18h7 all the money in circulation nma n?r nanitft iW2i At that time all money wus primary money?the measure of values was papermonoy itself. In 187; the per capita of all money in circulation, was 118.19, and all of it was primary money. In 1894 we had a per capita clr culation of primary and oredlt money combined of 124.23." The reason why | prices were not higher, as they should have been in 1894 than in 1872, was that of the $24 per capita only $0 was primary money, said Harvey. Horr rejoined: "1 am very muoh surprised to hear my friend say that we were getting along well during the years o( suspension of specie payment when we used entirely monoy that on its face had to be redeemed. His definition of primary money was money of redemption. Every greenback has to be redeemed to make it good. It is not primary money." Horr went on to say that it was the old greenback cry that the whole business hung on the amount per capita in circulation, and intimated that Harvey would have been a Green backer. Horr did not believe this doctrine; he believed the quality of the money had much to do with the matter. "This country was never more prosperous than from fb79, at I told you yesterday, up to 1392. There is not a man Jiving who can take the statistics and prove that wo were not doing well as a nation during all those years." Horr then asked Harvey who were, among the peoples of the earth, followers ot the silver idea, and enumerated China, Mexico, the S mth American States, eta, saying that the most progressive of those peoples were adopting the gold standard. Harvey denied the greenback Imputation and declared he had never written anything to justify such an imputation. The reason the civilized nations were adopting gold was that they were being tricked. t That was the way the money power had destroyed the Koman einolre. He then proceeded with the "soientiflj bimetallism" argument and said. "Credit money represents primary money. If a bank Issues it, It Is expeoted to redeem it in primary money, if the government issues it, It is expeoted in like manner to redeem it." The government, however, should not Issue it to an extent greater than It was possessed of primary money to redeem it with. He declared that a nation that borrowed from foreign nations was in process of decay and only exceptional statesmanship and vigorous action oould save such a nation from financial revolution and disaster. SEVENTH DAY. In o] ening the sev< nth day's debate on silver Horr referred to a statement made by Harvey that silver doluirs of 41-'}$ grains standard 6ilver were coined in 1371 and 1S7V for the poople of Nevada, Colorado and perhaps California out ot silver produced in tnu United State* and under the free coinage law. Horr said he could not understand how it could be as 412% grains of silver were worth more uncoiued than coined at that time. Horr added (hat he had hunted the matter up and found ihat the truth was this: "Congress had previously provided that cer ) tuin ioreign silver cuius snuuiu lkj redeemable at the treasury and the severui postofficcs and laud uffioes of the > government, at a certain fixed valuation. In the second section of the act of February 21, 1867, congress provided: 'And > be it further enacted that the said coina " when so received shall not again be paid " our or put into circulation, but shall be i recoined at the mint. And then the > director of the mint also tells us that over > <6,000,000 of silver had accumulated in the mints found in the gold during the pro> cess of assaying it. The silver dollars I which you tried to account for were ail > coined at the mint in Philadelphia, and not from the silver taken to the mint by our producers at all. I give my authority i as the report of the mints ot the United States. And I defy my friend I Harvey to show any Instance from i the report of the entire mints whore after > 1866 a dollar of our American product was ever received for free coinage in any i mint in the United States." Harvey replied: "Mr. Horr has persistently quoted in this debate authori> ties which he hns not produced here in this room. 1 want that impressed on the mind of the public. He has just made a i statement with reference to the coinuge ' of silver dollars that I deny, and he can[ not produce the authority here to prove f what he has said. 1 will only answer it 6 incidentally, but sufficiently. I hand Mr. I Horr the report oi the director of the ' mint for 1892, and call his attention to > 412,462 silver dollars coined at the mint i at Carson City, Nev., in the year 1870." He then proceeded with the argument in iujouuu tu piiiuaijr auu uiouiv iuuuo/, i preiacing his remarks with the state' meats that the change to gold standard." [It should be stated that Harvey has his whole argument prepared?written? and at hand. Each chapter of his book 3 is taken up in its order and discussed. i All tais matter was gotten up before the s debate began and the authorities he der petals on are placed in their order among ? ins manuscript. Horr speaks without notes and jumps irom one part of the f "School" to another as he finds some3 thing he takes issue with.] r Harvey then proceeded with his argu3 ment in order, taking it up where he i dropped it Tuesday afternoon. He said: ) "An over-issue of credit money creates a r lack of confidence in the ability of the r government to reaeem it, and a strain on f its primary money begins. In other 3 words, it causes a run on the government for the redemption of its credit money. 6 This forces the government to it-sue bonds i to borrow primary money. So long as this unheulthly relative proportion of credit money to primary money continues I t.hn run nr? this r.poAfliirc will r.nntimiA L VUV V... v. vv.w-V " i and the borrowing by the government must continue. And the more it borrows the greater the strain, as the interest on bonds demanded in primary money will be an additional strain. This is what Mr. Cleveland tails 'an enoless chain." 11 at a period like the present, when gold only is by law primary money, we increase the stock of credit money by issuing more paper money, or by coining more silver as credit money (the way in which it is now treated), we increase the strain on gold and hasten the financial chaos that must come. The quantity of gold now in the United States is variously estimated at from ?400,000,000 to fO'JO,000,000. The quantity of credit money outstanding is about II,000,000,000. Hence a surplus of from *400,000,000 to #600,000,000 of credit money t? uo-v in circulation, r and the run on the United States treasury must continue till the credit money is re; duced to the quantity of gold in theeouni try, or the stock of primary money la Increased. i "Ench time a government gold loan Is > made with, say, the Rothschilds behind 1 the treasury, temporary confidence will i be restored and prices will advance. The t government supplying itself with gold i aiiMcuc thn rvnlH hdnftluPd in f hn Tlnlfofi i States to let their gold out. But as the > goldeu sand in the hour glass at Washington runs out again, as It must, a scare returns, gold hoarding begins again, 1 the demand for gold increases, and prices i correspondingly fall. Tin? end is nationi al bankruptcy. To correct this system is , national prosperity." ' Horr then showed that Harvey had - mistated the facts when he said 413,462 in > silver dollars had been coined in the Car' son mint in 1870, and that it was 12.463, I Harvey having read the dollar mark as ! a figure "4." Harvey admitted this, and Horr went on: "Now this mint report which he handed me shows that after 1870 . up to 1874, In the entire mint in Carson , City there were only coined 19,288 of the ; old silver dollars. The mint report will Bhow that those were coined from the silver accumulated in assaying the gold taken to that mint. I now proceed to state that up to this moment Mr. Harvey has not said one word upon the real question In debate. He spent hours to prove that the law of 1873 was conceived | in sin and brought forth In Iniquity. I . gave a short succinot history of the origin of the bill and the steps taken In Its passage. He has not successfully contro versed a single statement of mine. He has nowhere proven any act of bribery or the Influence of money In a single step taken during the progress of that bill