Yorkville enquirer. [volume] (Yorkville, S.C.) 1855-2006, August 14, 1895, Page 2, Image 2
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