University of South Carolina Libraries
Harvey said: "Mr. Jefffferson did not close the mints, that could only be done by an act ol Congress. Mr. Jefferson directed the mint directors to coin the silver that came, at the option of the people, in fiftycent pieces and less. You need not coin a single unit, and yet by law the 371V4 grains of silver could be the unit of value regulating all other coins, all compared to It in legal and commercial ratio. The act 1873 made the gold dollar the unit, and now, by the act of September 15, 1889, it is unlawful to coin a gold dollar. So that we now have a unit of 23 2-10 grains of gold, and Congress has said that the mints ahall not coin any of them." a mipstion bv James rnlliniror "Why have I had so little silver or gold since the passage of the act of 1873?" it was to both Horr and Harvey. Horr said he couldn't tell unless he was informed how Bollinger had been behaving since that time. Harvey said: "Because we have been on a gold standard." Mr. Motsmyer of Shoals, Ind., asked if the debtor previous to 1873 had not the right to pay his debts in the cheaper metal. The reply was from Horr that It was perfectly proper and natural to so pay. THIRD DAY. Mr.Horr had the floor again at the beginning of the third day's debate on the silver question, and began the day's talk with a personal explanation. He said: "Previous to entering upon a discussion of the law of 1873 I desire to state something as to my personal relations in this debate, because my opponent yesterday stated 'Mr. Horr has only taught in this debate a proposition that is in the intt.ast of every selfish money-lender in the world to advocate, and he is here advocating it.' That Is a part and parcel of the method usually adopted by the advocate of free silver for the purpose of creating a prejudice against every person who has honest convictions on the other side of this question. I say to my opponent now I am not a money-lender, 1 have not a dollar's interest In any banking Institution or American corporation, or any other corporations on the face of the earth. I have spent my entire life In working for a living; all the early part of that life was spent in hard work on a small farm; I commenced working for myself at $10 a month; there is hardly any kind of hard manual labor in which I have not at some time in my life engaged, consequently my sympathies are with people who live by toll. "I can meet a dude on the street and pass him by without any peculiar sensation. I never meet a man digging in a trench but what I feel like taking off my hat and saluting him, because I once dug ditches for a living. I can pass by a railroad president, the superintendent of Pullman cars, without any emotion, but I never meet a brakeman or a oaggageman muiout feeling kindly toward him, because for months I was brakeman on a freight train night and day, and my promotion to baggagemaster was one of the proudest moments of my life. From my boyhood up I have li^ed, or tried to, on what I earned, and consequently I come Into this debate for the purpose of defending the interests, as my friend will learn before I finish it, of the men who live by honest toll. I admit that at present I am employed by a large newspaper corporation of the United States; If It will do him any good I will admit that they pay me every day for my work more than I used to get for two months' hard labor. Am I to blame for that? My policy has always been: 'Take any Job you can get bo sb to get an honest living, and never refuse to take a better one whenever the chance Is offered you.' Is that wrong? I have another motto, too, that whenever I am laboring for a pefson or corporation I am a good deal more anxious to earn all or more than I get than I am to be worrying round about crowding up my wages. My experience has been that if I do good work they will recognize my merits and pay me for It, and that is all I have any right to ask for in this world." Proceeding and concluding Horr said he had no prejudices against men who had been more fortunate than he; a man did not necessarily become a scoundrel because he saved part of his earnings; he did uot think it anything against a man even if he became a stockholder in a national bank. A suggestion that Harvey's father was such a stockholder brought from Harvey an emphatic denial, with the admission that it would not have hurt him if he had been. Horr closed by saying that those who accumulate money and build up great industries are a blessing to the country, and he was Just as zealous to prevent financial disaster to those as to see that wages are not cut in two by a debased dollar. Harvey in reply said his remarks of the day before quoted by Horr had no personal application at all. A man could advocate a pernicious principle without himself being necessarily a bad man. Said Harvey, continuing: "This great question is not going to be decided for the American people by any advocate parading himself before them as having been a horu.v fisted working man at one time in his life. I do not object to Mr. Horr giving the evolution of bis life. I do think it was a little unfair to have omitted that in that evolution he finally became a bank president; that statement should have gone with the balance in the play to popular favor. I do not deny that Mr. H'.rr and numerous selfish bank presidents have at one time been tillers of the soil. "Mr. Horr and numerous employes of newspaper corporations and other corporations are in part, many of them, representing their honest convictions, and I accord that to the honorable gentleman from New York. Many of them never stop to analyze the question, the great principle that must make or unmake the republic In which they live. It is only a question of salary that they consider." Harvey then said the value of the debe of the day previous was that it had demonstrated the statement that there were only $8,000,000 In silver coined up to 1873 to be false, and that the real quantity was $143,000,000. Horr, replying to Harvey's criticism that he had not included having been a bank president, said it was not omitted because he was ashamed of it. He had been a bank president; the bank had gone down in the crash of 1873, and his competency went with it. After a few more words regarding his present history he took up the demonetization act of 1873, saying: "That bill first originated a little before the year 1870. It was drafted after consulting a large number of experts. In the first day of our discussion Brother Harvey went back on his baby theory, and told us that babes did not mean babes at all. that it meant pure and undeflled people, but now he returns to his old motto and claims that money really is so simple a thing that babes can understand it. or that people who have not studied it can learn all about it; and he is facetious because I have stated that the question has given me the headache. I did state that. But, mark you. Brother Harvey, it was the study of the question that made my head ache, not writing such stuff as is in this book. That would not give any man the headache. "Now, this bill was prepared after submitting the question to a large number of experts all over the United States. We had ever Dad a revision of the mint laws for a great number of years, and the men In charge of the mint thought that the time had come when something should be done. Among the men who were consulted upon the question were Mr. Boutwell, the secretary of the treasury; Mr. Knox, deputy controller of the currency; Mr. Llnderman. the director of the mint; Mr. Parsons, superintendent of the mint at Philadelphia. The plan was submitted to these gentlemen and a large number of others for the establishment of a new system of mintage, and yet the free sliver papers of this country Intimate that this law must have been wicked, because It was tacked on to the revision of the mint laws. Why. that Is where it belonged. That was the place to find It. "Now, was there anything secret about It? I deny that it had its origination in England, or London, or anywhere except In the brains of the people who were looking after the coinage interests of the United States. And I defy Mr. Harvey? not by assertion?to prove one single Item that had anv reference to the British peo pie controlling or directing this matter. After a correspondence with a large number of these experts upon mints and coinage, the bill was framed, and with the correspondence was submitted to congress in the most complete form and with an elaborate report from Mr. Knox, which explained all its provisions. Every step taken in the inclpiency of this measure was as open as the light. "I am now reading from my own articles and consequently I use them without quotations. Thousands of copies of the bill were sent broadcast to all parts of the country. The Banker's Magaz'ue In Its number of July, 1870, printed this report of Mr. Knox and commented on the same. The bill prepared by Mr. Knox was endorsed by Secretary Boutwell, of the treasury, and transmitted to the senate on April 25, 1870. The bill as it was at that time drafted dropped the dollar silver coin of the United States and changed the unit of value. That was in the original bill as It was sent to the senate with a letter from j the secretary. Now, nobody tried to cover up that fact. In this report of Mr. Knox were found all the letters of these different | experts to whom had been sent a draft of the bill and who Lad been asked for their opinion upon it. Those letters were aU printed by order of the senate in connection with the carefully prepared report of Mr. Knox." Harvey here asked if Horr had the bill and letters with him. Horr thought he had them in the city and would produce them if he did have them, and continued as fol lows: "Mr. Patterson wrote to Mr. Knox and was printed In the public documents? for I will Bay to this house that every single document I have referred to I copied from the br.oks of the government In the city of Washington myself, individually, so I know what I am talking about. Mr. Patterson said: 'The sliver dollar, half, dime,, and three-cent piece are dispensed with l>y this amendment. Gold becomes the standard of money, of which the gold dollar 1b the unit. Silver Is subsidiary, embracing coins from the dime to the half-dollar.' Can anything be more plain than that? Was there any covering up of anything In that letter?" In reply Harvey proceeded: "In the Interrupted presentation of demonetization I had called the attention of the people to the condition, morally, of congress at the time of the passage of the act. I had referred to Impeachment charges against Vice President Colfax In 1873 for fraud in connection with legislation; to the resignation of Secretary of War Belknap for bribery. I now proceed, after first stating for Mr. Horr's information that Del Mar, the English historian, says that the act of 1816, demonetizing silver in England, had a clause in it that it might be reinstated by the king; that that clause g'vlng a right to reinstatement was repealed in 1871, and that the act in which it was repealed was within two weekB in the hands of Mr. Knox, the comptroller of the United States treasury, and was in part the basis of the act in this country." Harvey repeated that there was an era of corruption in congress at that time. "Clinton Colgate confessed before the ways and means committee of 1873 to the use of money to influence the incorporation of special features in the internal revenue bill, testifying, among other things, that Charles Sherman, of Ohio, a brother of Senator Sherman, had been paid $10,000 by the New York Stock Exchange in connection with the revenue bill. The officials of the stock exchange were subpoenaed, and the facts developed that while the money had not been paid, Judge Sherman had rendered a bill to the exchange for his services, and, as he claimed, for securing the services of his brother, Senator Sherman, to put the bill through. Colgate, when he testified, knew of the transaction and supposed the bill had been paid. As Judge Sherman was then a United States district Judge the ways and means committee turned the whole matter over to the judiciary committee, directing it to take action looking to his impeachment." He here read a letter from Judge Sherman to a member of the stock exchange, in which the judge claims to have been largely Instrumental in securing the repeal of certain taxes on bankers and brokers, Including the stamp tax. The Judge incloses a letter received from the father of the man he was writing to (said father having* died just before the judge's letter was written), in wnicn tne juage was askeu to work for the legislation desired and a consideration promised. The Judge tells his correspondent that he went to work In consideration of what was said in bis correspondent's father's letter, and "had interviews with Mr. Boutwell, with John Sherman, chairman of the senate finance committee, with General Garfield, and other prominent members of congress, and the result was that it became the policy of the administration to repeal not only the tax in question, but the stamp and other obnoxious taxes." Harvey concluded with the words: "It would readily exhaust the words of this debate to go into all the investigations of that notorious congress." Horr rejoined as follows: "The attempt of Mr. Harvey to smirch the congress of the United States and make the people of this country believe that the people who acted as members of congress in this country as a rule are corrupt and have been subject to purchase and sale, can be characterized onlv as infamous. There sit be fore me several members of congress who served with me in several congresses, and I appeal to each and every one of them If during their entire service they ever saw or mistrusted that money was being used to purchase members of congress. When men start out with the proposition that in order to prove their case they must also prove that the majority of the best men of this country are thieves and scoundrels, they had better stop before they begin. "I admit that Judge Sherman was guilty of a crime. That was never In any way connected with his brother, John Sherman, and you know it. They exonerated him." Harvey asked: "Did they Impeach Judge Sherman?" Horr replied: "Judge Sherman resigned immediately; they drove him from the bench." "But what has that to do with the auestion whether Mr. Knox openly and squarely presented this bill to congress? Mr. Knox said himself: 'The coinage of the silver dollar lece, the history of which is here given, is discontinued in the proposed bill. It is by law the dollar unit'?you read that yesterday?'and assuming the falue of gold to be 15^ times that of silver, being about the mean ratio for the last six years, it is worth In gold a premium of about 3 per cent, its value being $1.0312 and intrinsically more than 7 per cent premium in our other silver coin, its value thus being $1.0743. The present laws consequently authorize a gold dollar unit and a silver dollar unit, differing from each other in intrinsic value. The present g' ld dollar piece is made the dollar unit in the proposed bill and the silver dollar piece is discontinued.' A voice in the audience: "When was that written?" Horr: "Just before It was sent to congress in 1870. It was a part of the report that Secretary Boutwell sent to the senate in the spring of 1870; it accompanied the bill and was printed In the public docu-" ments as being an explanation of the bill by order of the senate. Is there anything hidden in those sentences?" Horr then gave Sherman's statement in the senate in August, 1893, showing the course of the bill in that body, the reports thereon, the fact that six senators from the Pacific coast made no objections to the bill, the frequency with which it was printed, etc. Horr then followed the bill into the house, after being passed by the senate by a yea and nay vote, Senator Stewart, of Nevada, voting for it. It reached the house Jan. 13, 1871, and was printed on motion of Willllam D. Kelly, chairman of the house coinage committee; a report in the meantime of a substitute was made, but that congress expired before final action on the bill. At the extra session in 1S71 it was introduced again, and again no action was taken. Kelly introduced it. Harvey then took the floor again and referred to the charge against George A. Bassett, clerk of the ways and means committee in 1873, of having demanded $2.r>0 per month from New York bankers and brokers to assist them in repealing the tax on borrowed capital, and quoted a Chicago Tribune Washington correspondent as follows: "Turkish corruption under the pashas and beys, or Russian official rottenness, could scarcely be worse than it is here." He referred also to the "salary list" bill, and said it was at this congress that silver was demonetized. Then he said that the bill as passed was not the bill supposed to have been passed. He quoted sections 15 and 21 of the bill with the words in brackets, the omission of which demonetized silver, as he claimed. He said: "As the bill passed both houses the unit was on gold, and free and unlim-: ited coinage of both metals was provided for. But as enrolled the mints were closed to free and unlimited coinage of silver, except as to the trade dollar, afterward abolished. The standard saver dollar was fraudulently omitted after the bill had passed both houses." Horr said the statement was preposterous. He quoted the words of Kelly, of Pennsylvania, in 1872: "We proceeded with great deliberation to go over the bill, not only by sections, but line by line, and word by word." Hooper was alBO quoted, April 9, 1872, that section 16 re-enactetf' "the previous existing by-laws, except in relation to the silver dollar, which is reduced in weight from 418% grains to 384 grains, thus making it a subsidiary coin." Replying Harvey quoted from Kelly, May 10, 1879: "It (the demonetization bill) was passed without allusion in debate to the question of the retention or abandonment of the standard silver dollar." Horr then quoted what Kelly said in the running debate in the house (not "by leave"), as follows: "All experience has shown that you must have one standard coin, which shall be a legal tender for all others. I again call the attention oi me nouse to me raci mat. me gentlemen who oppose this bill insist upon maintaining a silver dollar worth 3Vjj cents more than the gold dollar and 7 cents more than two silver half-dollars, and that so long as those provisions remain you cannot keep silver coin in the country." The above was 6aid by Kelly prior to the passage of the bill. After another dessertation by Harvey on the wickedness of humanity, Horr followed the demonetisation bill back to the senate and to its final passage, after being before congress for three years. Harvey then quoted Kelly as saying during the debate on the bill that it made no change in the existing value of coins. Harvey said: "While the record disclosed the intention to change the unit to gold, it nowhere revealed the intention to close the mints to silver." He further said: "The clause providing for the 384 grain dollar, with the right to unlimited free coinage, was surreptitiously erased from the bill in 1873 before it was enrolled." Horr then quoted Hooper as saying during the debate: "This bill provides for the making of changes in the legal tender coin of the country, and for substituting a legal tender of only one metal, Instead, as heretofore, of two." Horr proceeded: "I submit to this audience there is right there in that speech positive proof that that bill was well understood by the people who were legislating upon it. Mr. Potter opposed the bill, but uc v>ao iiaun cuwu^u iu oiaic luai uue provision in the bill met with his hearty approval, and that was the very provision we are debating here today. No better proof can possibly be given that that bill was, like all the bills passed In that congress, examined carefully, conscientiously." This ended the debate for the day, and Judge Miller announced that questions from the audience would be now received. Charles Coffin, of Arkansas, was the first questioner. He asked Horr why he opposed the American people acting on the free silver question. Horr replied that he had never on the face of the earth opposed such action. J."C. Sibley, of Pennsylvania, asked why, if the silver dollar was at 3 per cent premium in 1873 gold monometaiists claimed tnat me suver aonar was demonetized because silver was depreciating in value. Horr replied that the gold men never claimed anything of the kind. No nation that had demonetized silver gave that as a reason. In reply to another question Horr said It was true that Jefferson said to congress when he discontinued the coinage of th9 silver dollar a report of the director of the mint, in which the reason assigned for discontinuing the coinage was the scarcity of small change. Another reason in the report was "to Drevent the exportation of tho specie of the United States to foreign countries." On the request of Mr. Horr the further hearing of the debate was adjourned to 1 o'clock Saturday, Unlike most other boys of his age, the German crown prince is allowed no pocket money. FOURTH DAY. Mr. Harvey had the floor at the beginning ot the fourth day's silver debate and he proceeded to sum up his view of what the debate had so far shown as follows: "The debate so far Is of va iu In this: It shows first that gold aim silver is the money of the constitution; (2) that the silver dollar of 371% grains ot pure silver was the unit oi value in our monetary system and regulated the other coins in our coinage system from 1792 to 1873; (3) that silver ami gold In concurrent coinage was until 1873 the standard un.I measure of values ot all other property, and the basic principle of our monetary system; (4) that prior to 1873, when one metal increased in exchange value over the other, the debtor had the right to pay in the cheaper metal; (5) that silver was not demonetized by the act of 1873 on account of the over-production ot silver; (0) that 1143,0JO,Odd of silver were coined by our mints prior to 1873 " Harvey then entered a denial that he hail charged general lack of integrity on the Americau people, or that every man has his price. He simply did not intend that those corrupt in official life should "throw around themselves the cloak of the Integrity of the American.people. "He then proceeded with an explanation of Potter's position on the demonetization bill in the house. Potter had expressed suspicion of the bill because he thought It was to assist a speculation in nickel, the 1*11 I nurtwi/i lnr? r?/\l n urrQ r\f Q.C*unt. nioOUfl Uiil frJlKJV iUIUIJ ?v* VVtUU^W V? V Wl*?f J/IVVVU largely of nickel. Brooke was also suspioious of the bill. On May 27 the bill came ap in the bouse in tbe torni of a substitute, and Hooper moved suspension of tbe rules and the passage of the bill. Brooks wanted delay until Potter was present, but Hooper declined to wait, nor did he want the oill re id. L'ne motion was lost Harvey read The Bocord to the above effect. Horr took up the argument next. He said; "I have st.own you that this bill had its lncipiency among the experts on coinage in the United States. I quote here from W. A Shaw's History of Currency, page 275. "The first widely embracing international conference proper, hovxever, was the outcome of an expression of opinion in the conclave of the Latin Union. It was called at the invitation of France and met at Paris ou tbe 17th of June, 1877. The states represented were'?now listen?'Austria, Baden, Baden, Bavaria, Belgura, Denmark, Spain, the United States, France, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, ths Netherlands, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, Sweden and Norway, {Switzerland, Turkey and W'urtemburg. AH the states except Hollund declared in favor of the gold standard." "Now, that is the tecord of that conference showing that the subject was being agitated by the civilized nations of the world. It whs after that actiou that our experts commenced to examine the question and see what legislation should be enaut^d. I stated that they honestly engaged in that work. Has he proven a syllable to tbe contrary of that? The bill oi 1873 simply carried out a resolution of all these civilized nations of the world I showed you how openly, how completely, that bill was drawn in all fairness and sub mni/tu in ovary ubluu iu tuo American people. The silver mea have attempted from the start to smirch that bill by claiming that those men were false to their duties. "The first yarn that they told and published in a thousand papers broadcast all over the United States was that a man by the name of Ernest Seyd visited the United States and brought with him 1600,00Q in gold and that he paid that gold to secure the passago of that bill. Only a little while ago somebody happened to think that maybe Ernest Seyd had written something on the question. It occurred to some one to write to Mr. Hooper's widow and children and see if there wasn't something that could be found on that subjeot. They found a letter from Ernest Seyd iu reply to Mr. Hooper, who hud sent him this identical bill and asked his opinion on it. In the course of Mr. Seyd's letter he said: " 'As this is a new bill and presumably repeals all previous enaotments I suppose that the total abolishment of the silver dollar is contemplated. I think that the United States with her gold and silver mines is in an eminently favorable position to uphold the use of both gold and silver, and that the double valuation as it existed before would be of great benefit to the country. I am myself, as you will perceive from my writings, in lavor ot the full and complete adoption of the double standard,' and in that letter from Mr. Seyd from beginning to end, coverpages and pag69 of type-written ma6ter, he does nothing but oppose the very measure that these men say he spent so much money to pass through the American .congress." Harvey rejoined as fallows: "Thereport of the monetary conference at Paris in 1867 will contradlot the history that Mr. Horr has read from. As to Ernest Seyd and a letter found among Mr. Hooper's effects since he and Seyd both died, suppose in the years to come some one would say to the people then living that John G. Carlisle was a blmetalll9t 'and here is the proof of it,' and was to read from Mr. Carlisle's speech, 'The demonetisation of silver is the greatest crime of the ages and its consequences for evil are greater than all the floods and fires and pestilences of the past.' Would that prove that Mr. Carlisle Is a bimetal list at a particular tune when something might be charged against him when he acted as secretary of the treasury under Mr. Cleveland." Harvey then proceeded with the record of congress when the house refused to suspend the rules and pass the demonetisation bill without reading. "Mr. Hoiman asked this question: 'Before the question is taken upon suspending the rules and passing the bill I hope the gentleman from Massachusetts will explain the leading cnanges made by this bill in the existing law, especially in reference to the coinage. It would seem as if all the small coinage of the country is intended i? 1 1 I rp? ,1,1. lO UV rCUUIUOU. AU IUID iUl, llUU^Dl 4Dplied: 'The bill makes no ohangos in the existing laws in that regard.'" Harvey read other questions, none, however, referring to the demonetization of silver, t< show the character of those questions, a* Indicating that the members did not know the bill did demonetise the silver dollar. The rules were then suspended and the substitute passed The bill went to the senate and Harvey read from the record Sherman's desire to have it passed quickly, the senator saying that it would only take the time consumed in reading the bill. Harv.y quoted Sherman us follows in answer to a question by Cosserly: "If the senator will allow me, ho will see that the pre ceding section provides for coin which is exactly interchangeable with the English shilling and the Ave frunc piece of France; that is, the five franc piece of France will be the exact equivalent of a dollar of the United States in our silver coinage." In reply Horr said: "That is right, Mr. Hurvey. The bill that was reported to the senate and that they were then discussing had in it a provision for the oolnlng of sliver dollars, the silver dollars about wnich you talked at the last session of thin debate contanlng 381 grains, and they were made with all the other silver coins, subsidiary coins. The senate struck that provision out and substituted the trade dollar for that 381 grain dollar." Harvey?If you will snow me from the record of the proceedings in the senate on that day that the senate struck out that dollar we will stop this debate right here. Horr replied: "I have not the record, but I can get it. The law when it w >s passed had the trade dollar in it. Do you deny t.iai?" Harvey? No sir, I do not. Horr?And didn't that take the place of the other doilarf Harvey?No sir. Horr?I defy you to show a word anywhere that substantiates that position. "The only men who opposed that bill in the house were Clarkson N. Potter and Mr. Brooks, both millionaires from Wall street, both representing the very men that you say were trying to impose that bill upon this country for the purpose of aiding men who are rich. Mr Potter stated in so many words the truth; he thought it was inopportune, but he says: 'I am in favor of the gold unit. I am in favor of that provision of the bill.' That bill became a law by the substitution of the trade dollar. The law in ieterence to making the gold dollar the uult of value was never changed at any stage in the process of the bill. It is apparent, however, that the bill met with little opposition; not because its provisions were not understood, but because at that time no one cared very much about the sliver dollar." Horr quoted a letter from Senator Justin S. Morrill, of Vermont, to whom no body, he said, Imputed disnonor, in which Morrill said: "There has beeu a loud and delusive cry about the act of congress in 1873, which after three years of consideration by the treasury department and congress purposely omitted to provide for the further coinage of the sliver dollar, none having been ooinxi for nearly forty years and only 18,000,000 having ever been coined." To meet Horr's argument Harvey quoted Sherman, in the Forty-second congress, speaking of the Bilver dollar: "We are providing that it shall float all over the world." Again: "This bill proposes a silver coinage exactly the same as the French, and what are called the associated nations of Europe [ineuning the Latin union] who have adopted the international standard of sliver coinage; that Is, the dollar provided for by this bill Is the precise equivalent of the o-frano piece." Here Harvey reached the passage of the bill by ihe senate with slight changes in a few minor points, when it was referred to a conference committee which couid settle only disputed points and could not chmige wnat nud been agieed upon by both houses, he said, and the silverdollur clause [meaning a full legal tender dollar] was not a disputed point. The committee was composed of Senators Scott (Pa.), Bayard and Shermau, and Representatives Hooper (Mass.). titoughton (M.ch.) and McNealy (Ills.) Ana here was Harvey's poiut: He said that in that committee the 381 grain dollur was stricken out (the dollar that hod ui:ou n^ioou u (;uu, uiuioi ^uuui^too ui free coinage, by both houses). It presented its report and the congressional record says of the matter: "The report was concurred in"?"those Ave words, and no more." Both houses trusted their committees; the poiuts of disagreement were understood and the couim ttee was supposed to have performed its duty. Neither house asked any questions, nor was there any debato. Ho added: "If ihat doilar was only u subsidiary dollar, l.mited to the purchase of silver by the secretary of the treasury only and that was it" only virtue in that bill, why did it disappear iroin the bill?" Years afterward, he said, the report of the senate committee turned up so altered a." to show an amendment striking out the sliver dollar. Uorr defied Harvey to prove that the clntiRti makinc the crold dollar the unit of value was ever erased from the bill, or that in uny draft of the bill was the liver dollar made anything but a ?ubsidiary coin. He then said Harvey was wrong as 10 the procedure In conference. It not infrequently happened In changing disputed clauses that it was necessary to cuuuge clauses not disputed. But in any event the report had to be made and every change stated. He said: "No unusual thing was done with this bill. It passed almost precisely as the secretary of the treasury had recommended it when he first sent the draft to the Amerioan congress. The only other feature of any importance in It was the new feature of the trade dollar; otherwise it was nearly identioal with the bill that had first been drafted." Horr read a letter from Jasper Packard, of New Albany, Ind., in which he, who was a member of congress during the consideration of that bill, says: "I heard it all, Hooper's speech, and Kelley's and all the rest. The gold dollar was made the unit of value In the bill from its first printing, and a dollar of 381 grains was provided for and put in the Hat of the subsidiary coins, legal tender to only 15. Afterward that dollar was dropped entirely and the trade dollat with more silver in it was substituted. There was never any secrecy aoout it." Iu reply Harv.y said: "When he says In that letter that the trade dollar was substituted fur the dollar that was omitted lie is contradicted by the record of that dnv, from whioh l am now reading and whioh Is on this table before Mr. Horr. There was no substituting of the trade dollar for the dollar for whioh I am contending. I want you to show me where In any recorded proceeding of the debate lu the senate or house that dollar was struck ( t, and if you will show it here this debate will stop." Referring to the record Harvey followed the action of the senate to prove this, closing as follows: "In other words, by the record in the presiding officer's words, there was no amendment to seotion (16) lb, the silver dollar section, to be considered, and it was passed as it came from the house simply by being marked 'agreed to.'" Harvev then insisted that he was right regarding the procedure in conference committees, anil that suoh committees could not change anything agreed on by both houses. He charged that either men on the conference committee or some "fraudulent clerk" had stricken out the silver dollar. He asked "the voters of the republic to read the Congressional Record of Jan. 17, 1S76, and see for themselves that it is there expressed that the silver dollar was in the bill before it was emasculated by the conference committee, the silver dollar that was with the trade dollar to have free access to tho mints. Thus the conspiracy succeeded either by a corrupt olerk or the two men who made the report, or both." Horr offered to give Mr. Harvey his time if ho would show that the disputed dollar was given free coinage by the bill as it came from the house, and Harvey said he had already shown it. Horr replied: "This new dollar ..that was pro vldod for In the bill In the house as U went to the senate was just twice the size of the half dollar. Now the provision existed that the silver for making such half dollars should oe bought by tho government and that the seigniorage arising from coining such mon y, wuich was ^ worth less than it was worth on its face, should go into the government treasury. Do you behove they provide t for a coin containing double the amount of silver la the half dollar and agreed to take all the silver that should come to the mint and coin it into such dollars, and in the same bill also provided that if it was cornel Into half dollars the government should got jM It [the seignoragejf Men wouldn't go ^ and sell their stiver for tho market price 1 when the very bill would permit them to have it c >ined and give tnorn a larger price for it." Horr tiiou, after a review of the points upon which he and Harvey agreed anl differed, proposed to go into the questiou ?tne law being on the stature books? . Should It bo repealed? But Hurvey said . he wasn't tnrough with tue demonetiza- ^ tlon act. He quoted the Chicago Tribune of Jan. 18, 1873, which only brlifly mentioned in its telegraDhio report the passage of the bill, notwithstanding one of the money metals had been "struok down" by that bill. The reporters at Washington did not know It. Horr denied that thb passage of ihe law resulted In curtailing the silver money In olroillatton In this country, He proposod then S to go Into the question of ratio, but Har> vey said he had still somothlng more to say about the demonetization aot. Uuvvuc n iin r.u H 'Phurrrtun Fo h 1R 1 deolarlug coat be did not know the bill demonetized the silver dollar; Conkllng admitting his Ignorance of tbe fact March So. 1876; and Allison declaring, Feb. 15, 1878, that the bill had been "doo to red" and that It did not as passed rep resent tbe intention of the house. Uolman was quoted, July 13, 1876, da- '* olarlng that the matter of the bill's passage was "a colossal swindle" and as 11 passed was certainly not read to feha bouse. Said Holman: "I myself asked tbe questlou of Mr. Hooper, who stood near where I am now standing, whether It chaged the law In regard to oolnage^ and the answer of Mr. tioopor certainly left the Impression upon tbe whole house that tbe subject of the ooinage was not affected by the bill." Horr said: "I desire to say to the gentleman that just what one congressman or another may have said about this bill 1 neither know nor care. 1 know this, that the men composing the oongress of 1873 personally and individually have every one of them denied the staiemenl of corruption that you charge In the passage of this bill. I know that they have nothing but lnuendoes to base the charge upon. I know that they cannot make a oase unless they first prove that no decency was left In the American oon gress iii 1878." Horr then took up thj question of rates, saying that Harvey might continue "banglug at that old hole" If he so desired. He referred to Del Mar, of Loudon, to show the variation of the ratio between silver and gold from the beginning, showing that in the Arohalo s epoch, the earllst reoord, the ratio was 1 to 1. In the Vedlo period it was 1 to 4. In the Buddhlc epoch It was 1 to 6>f and so on down ~o 1769 when It had ohanged to 14 to 1. He wanted Harvey to explain this, and why It was the highly olvlllsed : nations that had adopted gold as the standard. Harvey, however, insisted on continuing the debate on the demonetization act, and said ne nad Intended to quote many m6re proo.s of the alleged fraud, but that i Horr's retreat made It unnecessary. He then quoted the Chicago Tribune, February 513, 1878: "This act, done secretly and siealthuy, to the profound ignornce of those who voted for it, and of the president who . iprovod it, hod, without the knowledge o the cuuntry, removed one of the landmarks of the government; had, under cover of darkness, abolished the conail utiunal dollar, and had arbitrarily _ and to the immense injury of the people, fl added heiviiv to every lorui of indebted- ^ nesS, public and private." Harvey coi. auded as follows: "The first questiou tita. strikes the innocent mind of to.lay is. w y has not this wrong been sooner rlirhtec? It is because, sirs, men stand bare-headed beneata a sun who*) enervating r. ys blind che eyed and destroy human onuracter. Tne same deception wh.cn originate! and comp.oi.ed this crime is still practiced upon tne people, ^ and the sniuc power that directed it then is directing it now. Tne child o( nature, standing in ae laboratory of the alchemlsc, can see the mjdt deadly poison made, but ltd appearance furnishes no evidence of it deadly power. "So it is w h the man who reads the act of 1873. such has been the effect of the act of 1813 that debastid one-half the money of the government. Its debasement consisted in destroying the attrl- ^ butes that gave to silver its value and power as a money metal. Its use siuoe in debased token money has served to deoeive the people by making tbern believe that It la primary money while not treating. It as suoh." FIFTH DAY. The fifth day of the Harvey-Horr do- ^ bate began with the chairman, Judge Miller, on the uoor. He simply requested the audience to respect the rights of the debaters, there having been on the part of a portion of the audience an Inclination to interrupt occasionally. Horr then began the debate by declaring that all attempts to fix the ratio between silver and gold bad been failures. A difference 1 between the legal and commercial ratios of ^ of 1 per cent had been sufficient to unvt> me ucurei lxic iai VUV u* aw J country. It had been so in this country. Gold was the dearer money up to 1834 add it left us; silver was the dearer alter 1834 and it lett us, so that in 1853 congress had to pass a law making the smaller silver coins much less weight in silver. "Coin" had said in his book that France had bid for our silver by establishing a higher ratio therefor, but France had made that ratio?15>? to 1?in 18j3 when our ratio was 16 to 1 and she got no silver from us up to 1834. He gave a review of the history of the ratio of France, and said that gold had been made the standard of the whole civilized world because it was believed to be more stable in value than silver and for other less important reasons. Harvey said that when he replied to the above his answer would be complete, but he desslred to talk further about the demonetization aot. He quote J the Morrill letter read by Horr at the previous debate. In Harvey's quotatlou Morrill says: "None [silver dollars] hav.ng been coined for forty years," aud Harvey referred to the mint report showing that Morrill wus mistaken, thero having been several millions of silver hollars coined in the forty years prior to 1873. Harvey imputed falsehood to Morrill becuuse hejwas a bank stockholder and the truth would not have served Morrill's interests. Horr explained that Morrill was not writing an essay on the number of silvor dollars coined in that time, but denying