deal very candidly with the advocates of free coinage. The prop- osition which now. comes to us from the Senate is to establish the independence of silver. Our free-silver friends have insisted that silver has been discredited,; that it has been denied access to the mints ; that it is not standard money, and that its dignity as money of ultimate redemption has been destroyed. It is now proposed by legislation to declare that silver shall be standard money ; that it shall be independent money ; that it shall no longer lean dependent upon gold, but that it shall depend upon its own merits and become, like gold, independent standard money of ultimate redemption. Mr. Chairman, the purpose is that all the people in the world holding all the silver bullion in the world, or that shall hereafter come into the world, shall have 6 the lawful right to bring it to the mints of the United States and to coin it into American dollars at the rate of 371 £ grains of pure silver to the dollar. Mr. Colson — Will the gentleman yield for a question ? Mr. Patterson— I hope my friend will permit me to proceed with my argu- ment without interference. I think it is better. Now, as 37l£ is 16 times 23.22,, it follows that this measure coming from the Senate, if it should be enacted into law, would give us a ratio of 16 to 1. And so the proposition is for this country to establish the free, unlimited and independent coinage of gold and silver into standard money at that ratio. I admit that if the commercial value of the sub- stance out of which the gold dollar is coined is equal to the commercial value of the substance out of which the silver dollar is coined, the purchasing power of the: two dollars will be equal and a bimetallic standard would result. The law which I desire to expound is this : If the commercial value of the substance out of which the silver dollar is coined has a lower commercial value than the substance out of which the gold dollar is coined, both being independent money, the purchasing power of one will be unequal to the purchasing power of the other, and the dollar which is coined out of the substance of the greatest commercial value will be worth more as bullion than as money, and will retire from circulation. Let us see how the law operates. By to-day’s quotation the substance out of which the silver dollar is made is worth 52 cents. The substance out of which a gold dollar is coined is worth; in the market, 100 cents. Therefore, in the open market you can exchange 371^ grains of pure silver for only 52 cents in gold, whereas in the same market you can exchange 23. 22 grains of pure gold for enough pure silver to coin 192 cents at the ratio of 16 to 1. Are we able to main- tain a bimetallic standard on such a basis as this ? Who would use gold in our circulation when he could take 23.22 grains of that metal and exchange it for sufficient bullion to coin 192 cents of full legal-tender standard money ? Now I have given you the reasons which underlie a law of universal applica- tion — a law that is as exact, that is as unvarying in its operations as the law of gravitation. I have not time to go into the history of other countries, but will briefly refer to the operation of this law in our own financial experience. In 1792, when the ratio of 15 to 1 was established, it was believed by Mr. Hamilton that he had conformed the coinage to the commercial ratio, and all the statesmen of that day recognized the existence of this law, and the absolute necessity of conforming legislation to it. But in a very few years the commercial value of silver slightly declined, and the result was that the substance in the gold dollar was worth a little more than the substance in the silver dollar, and immediately, under the operation of the law I have explained, gold retired from circulation and this country was forced to a silver basis. We all know that Thomas II. Benton and other American statesmen testified to the fact on the floor of the Senate in 1834 that gold had been absent from our circulation for a period of more than thirty years. Why was this Act of 1834 passed, changing the ratio from 15 to 1 to 16 to 1 ? What motive was it that controlled the statesmen in the days of Andrew Jackson in making this change in the coinage ratio ? The object was the restoration of the gold currency. Andrew Jackson, Thomas H. Benton, Daniel Webster, John C. Calhoun, giants in those days, recognized this universal law ; and, for the purpose of restoring the gold cur- rency, went to work to conform the legislation of the country to its mandate. They all insisted on the restoration of that currency, and they all insisted that it could only be restored when the coinage ratio was changed so as to make the substance in the gold dollar equal, or less than equal, to the commercial value of 6 the substance in the silver dollar. Nay, more. If gentlemen will take the pains to read the delmtes which took place at that time, they will find that Mr. Calhoun, Mr. Benton and other American statesmen contended that gold was the preferable money metal, and, over the opposition of the friends of the United States Bank, they passed the Act of 1834, fixing the ratio at 1G to 1, when the commercial ratio was in point of fact 15.58. So they purposely and intentionally made gold the preferable metal, but they did their work more perfectly than they intended, for ten years had not elapsed until silver was practically retired from the circulation of the United States. It will be remembered that from about 1845 to 1853 the people used “shin- plasters,” little slips of paper representing the 5, 10, 25 and 50 cent coins, and they were driven to the use of these shinplasters in their daily transactions, because, under the operation of the law of 1834, not only the silver dollar but the small coins were driven out of circulation, so that the people did not have change for small transactions. So complete was the operation of the law I have invoked in that instance that in 1853 the Congress of the United States passed an itct reducing the silver in minor coins, and declaring that the half dollar, the quarter dollar, the dime and the half dime should be coined at the rate of 384 grains to the dollar, and should be a legal tender for only $5. I call the attention of the Committee to the historical fact that when the Committee on Ways and Means, in a Democratic Congress reported that bill, it was openly declared upon this floor that the country was then upon the gold standard, and it was the pur- pose and object of the committee that silver should occupy a subordinate relation to gold. Let us see for a moment what the operation of this law was from that time down to the breaking out of the civil war. From the 1st day of January, 1835, after the passage of the Act of 1834, down to the 1st day of January, 1862, when specie payments were suspended during the war, this Government coined $55,000,000 in silver, only $1,700,000 of which were silver dollars, the remainder being subsidiary coins. During that time we coined nearly twice as much in 5-cent pices as was coined in silver dollars. But we coined during the same time in gold the enormous sum of $353,000,000. Where is the man who can deny the assertion ? Where is the man who can refute the proposition that this country in that day and genera- tion was practically, and to all intents and purposes, on a gold standard ? When specie jiayments were suspended both gold and silver disappeared from circulation by the operation of the law which I have explained, and more gold and silver retired from the country during the period of suspension than the sum total of all the greenback and national bank note currency then in circu- lation. During the period of suspension came the Act of 1873. I am not going to discuss the righteousness of that legislation. I have always expressed regret that this country had not then united with the Latin Union for the purpose of retaining and maintaining, if possible, the bimetallic standard. But the act was passed ; its work has been accomplished, and we, in common with the other com- mercial powers of the world, are on a gold basis. The main fact which I wish to impress, in all solemnity, upon the members of this Committee is that from the organization of the Republic down to the hour when the free-silver propaganda was inaugurated, in 1876, no American statesman ever disputed the law which I invoke to-day ; and I think I can safely challenge every free-silver advocate in this^ House to point to one American* statesman, from the days of Washington down to Samuel J. Tilden, who ever intimated by speech or vote that this country alone could maintain the bimetallic standard at a ratio which differed from the 7 commercial ratio of the two metals. It was in 1876 that the agitation for the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1 was begun. What a spectaole, Mr. Chair- man, has this country presented to the enlightened world since that time ! I have seen members of Congress, in defiance of the law which I have invoked, delib- erately vote for the ratio of 16 to 1, then 17 to 1, then 18 to 1, then 19 to 1, then 20 to 1, all in one day, on a succession of roll calls. Tell me, Mr. Chairman, what would the statesmen of the days of Hamilton and Jefferson have thought of a performance like that ? Tell me what the statesmen in the days of Jackson and Benton, of Calhoun and of Webster, would have thought of such reckless defiance of a universal economic law ? When silver and gold are on a parity an ounce of silver is worth about $1.29. Yet in the history of this controversy, from 1876 down to the present hour, the advocates of free coinage have never inquired into the relative commercial value of the two metals. When silver fell to $1.20 an ounce they were in favor of free coinage at the ratio of 16 to 1. When it fell to $1.10 an ounce they were in favor of the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1. When it fell to $1 an ounce they were in favor of the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1. When it fell to 90 cents, then to 85 cents, then to 80 cents, then to 75 cents, then to 70 cents, they were still in favor of the free' and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1. And to-day, when an ounce of fine silver is worth only 67i cents, these same devotees of silver cry out for the free coinage of silver at the same old ratio of 16 to 1. Mr. Chairman, have I not stated the facts of history truly ? I see in his seat my friend from Georgia [Mr. Turner], who honors me with his attention. I ask him what would Georgia’s greatest statesman, Benjamin H. Hill, have thought of a proposition such as the one now proposed ? When 371 £ grains of pure silver were worth 87 cents he denounced a measure for the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1 as a “pickpocket ” bill. What would he say if he were here to-day, confronted with a proposition to coin silver into standard money at the same ratio, when 371 £ grains of pure silver are worth only 52 cents ? I am also honored with the attention of a Bepresenjiative from the State of Mississippi [Mr. Catchings]. What would L. Q. C. Lamar, the brightest jewel in the crown of that State, say if he were here shedding lustre on American legis- lation, as he did in the days gone by, when brought face to face with such a measure as this ? These halls once reverberated with his matchless eloquence when he exposed, with unanswerable logic, the absurdity of adopting a coinage ratio in defiance of an economic law of universal application throughout the com- mercial world. Mr. Chairman, this is a new era in finance ! You cannot find any statesman outside of America — not even the bimetallists of Europe — who will advocate a doctrine directly opposed to the universal experience of mankind. The position taken by the sound-money men that the bimetallic standard can only result where the coinage and commercial ratios correspond is so invul- nerable to assault, so fortified by reason, and so illustrated and exemplified by all experience, that the advocates of free silver cannot assail it. They have avoided all reference to it in the discussion of this question when it is possible to do so. Some of them in this debate have been driven to admit that the passage of this act would force gold to a premium, while others attempt to escape the inexorable logic which environs this measure by insisting that while it would not result in retaining gold and silver in concurrent circulation it would secure an alternating standard of the two metals. That is to say, when gold became more valuable commercially than it was as money it would retire, and then when silver became more valuable commercially than as money gold would return and silver retire, 8 and in tliat way the United States would alternate, first leaning upon one stand- ard and then upon the other, thereby securing an alternating currency of gold and silver. If all the commercial powers in the world were attempting, as in the past, to maintain the bimetallic standard, and the ratios fixed by them respectively con- formed as near as might be to the commercial ratio, then it is altogether possible that the circulation would in some degree alternate ; but this, Mr. Chairman, is altogether speculative and the idea advanced by my friends is altogether chimer- ical. When you take into consideration that all the commercial powers in the world have suspended the free coinage of silver, there is no room for the dis- credited metal to alternate with that metal which enlightened mankind has adopted as its measure of value. Suppose we had adopted the ratio of 16 to 1 twenty years ago, would it have returned even once during all that period ? And now that silver has declined until the bullion in a silver dollar is worth only 52 cents, is it not absolutely certain, in view of all the conditions which environ the commerce of the world, that gold would be driven out of our circulation, and would, so far as we can judge of the future, never return ? Sir, the Bland-Allison Act was passed in February, 1878, as a substitute for a free-coinage bill. The silver in a silver dollar was then worth 87 cents. That act was passed in utter disregard of the commercial value of the two metals. Here was the first blunder which led up to the catastrophe of 1893. That law has now been repealed. But I ask you, now that it has passed beyond the heat of partisan discussion, to consider it in the light of reason and common sense. Here was an instance where the most enlightened, the greatest, and most power- ful of all the governments of the earth entered the open market and purchased silver bullion under a law which required it to coin at its mints bullion which cost it 87 cents into a dollar impressed with all the qualities of full legal-tender money ; and to coin such dollars to the extent of at least $24,000,000 annually. The profit made by the transaction was to be covered into the Treasury. Nothing could rescue the Government from the charge of jugglery and dishonesty in a transac- tion like this except its implied promise to maintain the dollar so coined on a parity with all other forms of currency. If there is any obligation resting upon the United States more sacred than every other, it is its duty to maintain these dollars on a parity with gold. Other- wise we would have the spectacle of this Government purchasing silver bullion with gold and then coining that silver at the ratio of 16 to 1 and sending it out into circulation to be received in payment of its own obligations and the obliga- tions of its citizens. As the coinage of silver under the Bland-Allison Act was in direct violation of an economic law*, for the observance of which I am contending, it follows that our silver currency thus coined is, to the extent of the difference between its purchasing power and commercial value, fiat money, and depends on the disposition and ability of the United States to maintain it on a parity with our other currency. Hence these silver dollars remain with us, and will remain with us for all time to come. You cannot send out into the arteries of foreign com- merce coined money discredited in this manner. It is only secure in its purchasing power within the jurisdiction of the government creating such a currency. It is a governmental contrivance, and not the money of commerce. Then came the Act of July 14, 1890, by which Congress authorized the Secre- tary of the Treasury to go into the open market and purchase each month for all iime to come 4,500,000 ounces of silver bullion, and to issue in payment Treasury notes. The act then required that the silver so purchased should be coined at the ratio of 16 to 1 and employed by the Government in the redemption of its notes. I put it to the committee as a question of honorable and fair dealing by 9 a government, Was tliat act not a financial monstrosity ? Was not that kind of jugglery and profit-making by a government at variance with every principle of sound finance ? There was but one provision of the law which rescued the United States from national dishonor, and that was the provision which required the Government to maintain the parity of all its money* But this injunction was not sufficient to prevent the catastrophe which followed. The whole commercial World took alarm and the question was naturally asked, How long can a government, however great and prosperous, issue this paper money in the purchase of silver bullion on the terms required by the act, and indefinitely, without involving its Treasury in such a condition that it could not maintain a parity between its paper currency and gold? An assault was almost at once made upon the Treasury reserve, and for four or five years we have either been drifting into or have been in the midst of a great financial disaster. Can the seigniorage, so called, which the Government has made on this transaction, bi the profit which it has made under the Bland-Aliison Act, repay the American people for the losses which they have sustained growing out of the instability of our currency incident to such legislation ? Was the Treasury of a great govern- ment ever before in times of peace in such a dilemma ? With more than 400,000,000 silver dollars in circulation, with $346,000,000 of United States notes payable on demand, constituting a part of its currency, and with $155,000,000 of Treasury notes outstanding, given in the purchase of silver bullion, and these Treasury notes accumulating every month to the value of 4,500,000 ounces of silver, and with the obligation resting upon the Government to maintain a parity between all its dollars, how was it possible, to avoid disaster ? With a large proportion of the representatives of the people clamoring for the free coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, and demanding that the Secretary of the Treasury should, without regard to law and the just obligations of the Govern- ment, pay silver in the redemption of its notes ; with Shylocks preying on the Treasury reserve and the marts of trade and commerce everywhere in doubt and confusion as to what the result might be, I submit the spectacle is not one which reflects credit on American legislation. No such flagrant violation of the established i and recognized laws of finance has occurred in modern times. Lying at the root of our trouble is the universal knowledge of the operations of the law which prohibits the concurrent circulation of gold and silver coined at a ratio dispro- \ portionate to the market ratio without the aid of the Government in maintaining the parity. The Senate has passed the measure before us. The American people await the action of this House, confident that it will maintain the honor of the Govern- ment and the integrity of the currency. But the truth is that the conviction pre- vails in every commercial community throughout the United States that this Senate substitute would destroy the parity between gold and all other forms cf currency, and would impair and contract public and private credit to such an ex- tent as to involve the American people in a catastrophe which would destroy all prosperity and entail upon them an area of financial disasters from which this generation could not recover. Mr. Northway — Would it disturb the gentleman at this point if I were to make a single suggestion ? Mr. Patterson — I have only a few moments, and would prefer to proceed without interruption. Mr. Northway — I agree with the gentleman in his views, and I want to hear him on one point which I was about to suggest. Mr. Patterson — Probably I shall touch upon it. This is the condition of ^flairs to-day. It has been the condition of the country, except when ameliorated 10 by tho sale of bonds to replenish the gold reserve, since the panic began in 1893. To-day its solvency and the parity of its money depend absolutely upon the patriotism of its citizens in standing by it in the hour of its need, and their con- fidence in their immediate representatives on the floor of this House and in the Executive at the other end of Pennsylvania avenue. Mr. Chairman, I have now traced the history of our financial legislation in respect to the coinage for more than one hundred years, and I think I have demon- strated the unvarying operation of the law which forced one standard money out of circulation where the substance out of which it is coined is more valuable than the substance out of which is coined some other standard money. Our expe- rience is in accordance with the teachings of science and the practical judgment of the business world. No evasion is possible. The Commercial world understands, scientists understand, and the people will understand, that the free and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, when the commercial ratio is 32 to 1, means only one thing, and that is, silver monometallism for the United States. I beg the advocates of free coinage to look abroad over the world and challenge them to point to a single country where the free and unlimited coinage of silver and gold is authorized by law which is not admittedly on a silver basis. Take this fact in the light of the teachings of science, and in the light of our own experience as a nation, and it is impossible for them to escape the imputation that their purpose is, not to advance the cause of bimetallism, but to force this country to a silver standard, ' i Mr. Chairman, the only remaining question for discussion is, whether it is advisable for this country to abandon the gold standard, which it now has, and deliberately adopt for itself the single standard of silver. I admit that when I first began to investigate this subject I was fascinated with the idea that the United States might unite all the American Republics upon a silver standard, construct the Nicaragua Canal, open up trade with the East, and compete with England for the trade of the world. But as I proceeded in the investigation I saw this was a delusion and a dream. I hope the Committee will bear with me while I give some of the reasons which influenced my judgment. To precipitate the country to the silver basis would produce inextricable confusion in every department of business. Sup- pose you elected a President and Congress pledged to the passage of such a law. The President elected would not take his seat until the 4th of the following March, and the Congress elected would not assemble until the first Monday in December following the inauguration of the President, and then it would probably take six months before a law could be passed and put in force. In the meantime the wildest confusion would ensue. Every bank and every holder of gold would hoard it. Creditors everywhere would enter into a fierce struggle to secure the better money in payment of their debts. That debtor who would not renew his debt payable in gold would be driven to the wall. American securities would be forced upon the market. A government which had borrowed gold dollars worth 100 cents for its people, and had then deliberately enacted a law w T b.ereby it pro- posed to discharge its obligations in dollars worth 52 cents, would be discredited throughout the world. Its securities and the securities of its citizens would be everywhere discredited, and the rush that would be made for liquidation would be irresistible. As we are a government of the people, both people and government would share the same fate. For years the investors of money in the United States have been taking their securities payable in gold. ' The banks have to-day the gold very largely in their reserve. The great life insurance companies, which have insurance on the lives of the' American people amounting to $7,000,000,000, have been for years collecting their premiums in gold or its equivalent and invest- 11 ing them in gold assets. The election of a President and Congress pledged to the free coinage of silver would at once result in the withdrawal of every dollar of gold from the Treasury, in the payment by banks of silver to their depositors, in the payment of silver by the life insurace companies to their policy holders, and force on the market great quantities of property to be sold for debts payable in gold. In the meantime all kinds of business would be paralyzed, manufactories wbuld be closed, labor would be discharged, and we would have in a most aggravated form all the adverse conditions which existed during the panic of 1893. Again, the wit of man could not devise a scheme better suited to place the property of the country more absolutely at the mercy of orgatrized and aggressive capital. If it was the purpose of its advocates to create a moneyed aristocracy and a race of peons out of the freemen of America, a more effective plan than this could not be adopted. Be it remembered, Mr. Chairman, that an unstable and fluctuating currency always enriches the few and impoverishes the many. Once disturb and derange the medium of exchange and all will be confusion and disaster. Again, Mr. Chairman, gold is the money of commerce ; and, whether we retain the gold standard or abandon it, we cannot conduct our foreign trade on any other standard. It is the money of all the countries to whom we sell our farm products. We neither export cotton, wheat, corn, meat, butter or other farm products to the silver-standard countries. It is not a matter of choice with us. We are compelled to sell our products to gold-standard countries or go out of business. The prices of our products are all, therefore, measured in gold. As it is now, we measure products in terms of gold, not only in foreign countries, but in our own. Our merchants take into consideration only the rise and fall of the commodities they buy and sell, and they are not afflicted with any doubt in respect to their money. If we were on a silver basis, then our products would be purchased in silver and sold in gold, and as silver rises and falls in terms of gold, like other commodities, there would arise an additional risk to the merchant ; and every additional risk is another burden on the producer. If the purchasing power of a silver dollar compared with gold was 50 cents to-day, and cotton was worth 8 cents per pound in gold, the cotton buyer could not afford to pay 16 cents in silver per pound, because by the time he delivered the cotton the silver might have declined to 49 cents, and the loss would be his. This explains why manufacturers and merchants in silver-standard coun- tries are at a great disadvantage in conducting their business. It is a double risk — risk in the stability of prices and risk in the stability of their money. They are eaten up by the money changers, and at last the loss falls on their cus- tomers. Again, the matter of interest cuts an important figure in the solution of this problem. Sound money and a low rate of interest are inseparable. After the war, when greenbacks were our only currency and gold was at a high rate of premium, the rate of interest, like the rate of exchange, was very high. One per cent, a month was the usual rate of interest, and I remember that in addition to that 2£ per cent, was charged the farmers for advances. Frequently more than half the debt of the farmer to his merchant was composed of usury. Now all that is changed, and we have a uniformly lower rate of interest. This must also be taken into consideration when we think of going to a silver 'standard, for the matter of interest, like the matter of exchange, would then enter* into the calculation and very seriously embarrass commerce. But, Mr. Chairman, agriculture, commerce and manufactures cannot prosper in countries which are denied the use of the best money. To show this it is only necessary to call attention to the gold and silver standard countries. Here are the 12 gold-standard countries : The United States, England, France, Germany, Russia, Belgium, Denmark, Holland, Norway, Sweden, Austria-Hungary, Spain, Portugal, Italy, Switzerland, Servia, Greece, Bulgaria, Egypt, Turkey, Australia, Canada, Cuba, Brazil and Chile. 0£ these, Austria-Hungary, Russia, Brazil and Chile have recently gone to the gold standard. Here are the silver-standard countries : China, Japan, India, what are known as “ The Straits,” the Central American States, the South American Republics, except Brazil and Chile and the semi-civilized nations of Africa. You will see from this enumeration that there is not one silver-standard coun- try on the globe which could be classed as a prosperous, enlightened and pro- gressive nation. All of the enlightened countries have suspended the free coinage of silver and adhere to the gold standard. If we should abandon it we would take a step backward. The fact cannot be disguised that as civilization advances the preference for gold has been everywhere manifested throughout the world. It is an evolution giving expression to the choice of enlightened mankind for the best money attain- able. Again, Mr. Chairman, another consideration which has influenced my judg- ment is that all gold countries largely use silver as money, whereas silver-standard countries do not use gold at all in tlieir circulation. The truth is, sir, that the gold-standard countries use more silver in their circulation than the silver-standard countries, notwithstanding the latter have more population than the former. I do not mean by this that there is no gold whatever in silver-standard countries ; but I do mean that it is not used as a circulating medium. Therefore if we pass an act for the free and unlimited coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1, it means the establishment of the silver standard and the immediate exclusion of gold from our country. While it may have the effect to give us dollars of less purchasing power, it will give fewer of them. We now have, according to the best estimates, about $600,000,000 of gold in circulation, and free coinage means the loss to the country of all this gold in the form of money. It will be hoarded at once, and either kept as treasure or sold to foreign countries, for no man would use it as money when he could use something only half as valuable. Again, Mr. Chairman, there is another lesson to be learned. The advocates of free coinage are always insisting on a larger volume of money. It may seem singular, but it is nevertheless true, that invariably the gold-standard countries have the larger circulation. France, the United States, Germany and England, in the order I have named them, have a larger circulation than the other countries, and they all have the gold standard. I have made a careful investigation of the matter, and I have not been able to find any silver-standard country w'hich has a per capita circulation exceeding $5. The United States and Mexico are adjacent American Republics. I think I am safe in saying that the United States is the most prosperous gold-standard country in the world, and that Mexico is the most prosperous silver-standard country. A recent comparison shows that Mexico has only 43 cents per capita in gold, which does not circulate ; 17 cents in paper, and $4.31 in silver, making a total per capita circulation of $4.91 ; whereas the United States has $9.01 in gold, $9.18 in silver, and $6.15 in paper, making a total per capita circulation of $23.34. How do you account for this significant and import- ant fact ? It shows, in my judgment, conclusively that the volume of money follows always a large volume of business. Sir, the idea that money precedes prosperity is a mistake, but wherever pros- perity sets in, there money invariably goes. When the conditions are favorable for investments, money will be forthcoming ; and when they are unfavorable it will remain away. A good and fruitful soiL tilled by thrifty and industrious farmers. who diversify their crops and make year by year a surplus of products, will pre- sent a condition of affairs which will invite investment in that community ; money will increase in volume and general prosperity prevail. The same applies with equal force to nations. Those Governments which are not advancing, and in whose confines all opportunity is lost and stagnation prevails, require no great volume of money. The autocratic few live in listless idleness, while the masses are in a state of peonage. But when there is a quickening impulse, demanding money to set in motion the wheels of progress, and to send thrift and prosperity through the arteries of commerce, then it will make its appearance and perform its functions. These conditions not only require money, but the best money. And here lies the reason for the phenomenal fact that prosperous and enlightened coun- tries all have a gold standard and a greater volume of money than the silver- standard countries. But, Mr. Chairman, there is even a greater reason to influence my vote on this measure. The dignity of labor must be preserved if we would preserve our free institutions. The great majority of mankind must labor for their daily bread. I do not say it for political effect, but I utter a great truth which right-thinking men everywhere in the world will approve, when I lay down the proposition that it is the chief end of good government to secure for its citizens the right to labor under the most favorable conditions. The men who work are the true soldiers in the army of civilization. I have repeatedly said that a day’s work was the true unit of value, and that that community was the most blessed and enjoyed the greatest prosperity where a day’s labor brought to the toiler the most comforts of life. We all know, sir, that in times of distress the masses who labor suffer most. We have had a recent experience. In 1893, when the great panic swept over the country, the rich, notwithstanding their material loss, still lived in comfort ; but the poor — the men who worked for their daily bread — were thrown out of employ- ment. When commerce was paralyzed and manufactories were shut down, men with brawny arms were left without work and their children to cry for bread. It is in such times that our free institutions are put to the severest test. They call for the exercise of the best thought and the highest patriotism on the part of those who have been intrusted with the duty of making and administering the laws. Agriculture, commerce and manufactories can only prosper in the enlight- ened, progressive countries which have adopted the gold standard ; and I now assert that men who labor are dependent on these conditions for their well being, and that there is not a silver-standard country in the world where they earn wages sufficient to maintain them in comfort and independence. Before the death of the lamented Judge Gresham I called at the State De- partment and requested to have tables made up from consular reports showing the weekly wages paid labor in all the countries of the world, classifying them as gold and silver standard nations ; and it is a comparison between the wages paid in the different countries of the world that bears me out fully in the assertion that I have made so often and so emphatically, that laboring men do not earn wages sufficient to maintain them in comfort and independence in any silver- standard country on the globe. Notwithstanding all we have heard from our free-silver friends to the con- trary, silver-standard countries are the abode of petty tyrants and miserable serfs and dependents. As silver declines the prices of the necessaries of life improve, but wages do not advance in proportion, and the misery of the poor keeps pace with the instability and depreciation of the currency. Sir, "gold is sometimes called the money of the rich, and silver the money of the poor, by the people who try to persuade the poor to adopt their financial 14 vagaries. The rich, and especially the rich in money-holding, may fatten on a depreciated currency, for it furnishes unending opportunities for speculation. Not so with the man who labors. He has neither the means, the opportunity, nor the information on which to speculate. He only knows that he gets such a wage in money, and if the money is bad he is indeed unfortunate. Of all men, he who works for a wage is interested in securing for the price of his toil money which is equal in purchasing power to the best money ; and of all men, he is most inter- ested in securing for his country conditions of prosperity because it is on the prosperity around him that he depends for employment. Sir, we hear a great deal said about the oppression of the debtor class, and it is assumed that the poor are generally debtors and those who conduct the busi- ness of the country are the creditors. This is all a mistake. The wage earners of the country are, almost to a man, creditors, whereas the merchants, manufac- turers and traders of the country are generally debtors. The men and women of the country who work for wages and salaries are creditors every week to an enormous amount, whereas the business men are constant borrowers. Both classes are equally interested in the cause of sound money, because business can- not be conducted satisfactorily with an unsound and fluctuating currency, and the people who work for wages and salaries cannot get employment and neither can they rely for their support on wages which are not paid in money as good as any other. All alike are interested in seeing that every dollar is as good as any other. All alike are interested in seeing that every dollar is as good as every other dollar. Again, Mr. Chairman, I belong to the party of tariff reform. The people, and especially the people of the Southern States, have felt most keenly the unjust, excessive and oppressive tariff laws. For more than twenty-five years our party has waged a relentless war on the Republican party in an effort to lift the burden of oppressive taxation from the shoulders of the people. Class legislation, by which the substance of one man is taken in order to enrich another, has been the long-continued aversion of the party to which I belong. How often have you heard free-silver Republicans on the floor of the House declare, during the present discussion, that the silver standard would operate as a high protective tariff ? Sir, the liberty of commerce and sound money go hand in hand. If we ex- pect to continue to sell our products in the markets of the world and continue our trade relations with other nations, we must, in order to compete with such countries as England, France and Germany, maintain for our merchants the standard of commerce. Sir, it has been stated time and again that we have had a very great apprecia- tion of gold since 1873 and a very great decline in values. It is not my purpose to enter upon a critical discussion of this question. I propose to call the atten- tion of the committee to one great fact in our history, which, in my judgment, refutes the proposition. It is logically and ridiculously absurd to argue that the decline in prices of commodities, brought about by the marvelous inventions and improvements of the age, is the result of the fall in the price of silver. The truth is that silver itself is a commodity, and, like all other commodities, under modern conditions, it can be produced at less cost than formerly, and it has de- clined for the same reason that wheat has declined and manufactured products have declined. But the great fact which stands out in our history is, that during the very period referred to we have had a marvelous accumulation of wealth in the United States. It must be conceded by every thoughtful student of the history of his country that the United States was practically on a gold standard from 1850 to 1860. Leaving out the decade in which the war took place, we had from 1870 15 to 1880 another period of ten years when the country was on a depreciated paper basis. Then another ten years, from 1880 to 1890, when we were admittedly on a gold standard. Now, Mr. Chairman, the very important fact to which I desire to call the attention of the Committee is, that in 1850 we had a population of 23,191,876. In 1860 it had increased to 31,443,321. In 1850 the wealth of the United States amounted to $7,135,780,228. In 1860 it had increased to $16,159,616,068. Now, during that period we had 35 per cent, increase of population and 126 per cent, increase of wealth. This was under the gold standard. In 1870 the population of the United States amounted to 38,558,371, and in 1880 to 50,155,783, showing 30 per cent, increase in population. In 1870 the wealth of the United States amounted to $30,068,518,407, and in 1880 amounted to $43,642,000,000, showing only 45 per cent, increase. Now, in 1890 our population amounted to 62,622,250 and our wealth to $65,037,091,197, showing an increase of wealth amounting to 49 per cent. Now, these two decades, from 1850 to 1860 and from 1880 to 1890, being the decades in which we had not only the gold standard but the greatest public confidence in our currency, were the decades in which we have had the largest in- crease of wealth during our national history. * I do not pretend to say, Mr. Chairman, that this wealth was justly or equally distributed. I contend that under the operation of unjust tariff laws and other legislation it was not distributed as it would be under just and equal laws. But this is not the fault of the currency. The currency affects alike all sections and all classes of our people. Finally, Mr. Chairman, a controlling reason with me is the enormous pro- duction of gold in recent years and now going on all oyer the world. For years back it was predicted that we were on the eye of a gold famine. Our free-silver friends still cling to this gloomy prophecy, and never tire in declaiming about the appreciation of gold and its insufficiency to supply the demands of commerce. The truth is that under modern conditions in this age of telegraphy and railroads and steamships money can perform five times the service it could two hundred years ago. Credit and confidence constitute the foundation on which modern com- merce rests. It is not the transferring of actual money, but the transfer of c" dits, redeemable in money, which causes the wheels of commerce to move. Thomas H. Benton once said on the floor of the American Senate, during the discussion which resulted in the passage of the Act of 1834, that all mankind had a predilection for gold. I do not subscribe to the idea that the free coinage of silver has been suspended by the commercial powers on account of the overpro- duction of that metal, but I insist that this has been brought about by the exer- cise of this predilection on the part of enlightened mankind for the-better money. It has been an evolution growing out of the fact that the increased production of gold has enabled the commercial world to make its selection of the best money. From the time Columbus discovered America, in 1492, down to and including the year 1895, the world produced $8,780,467,400 in gold. And of this amount it produced $5,830,602,400 within the last fifty years. In other words, the world produced $2,949,865,000 more gold within the last fifty years than it produced in the preceding three hundred and fifty-three years. Nor is this all. The world produced $787,463,000 in gold during the first fifty years of this century ; and in the last five years it produced $815,378,800, or $27,900,000 more within the last five years than it produced in the first fifty years of this century. Owing to modern improvements and new discoveries, low- grade ores are now being treated everywhere profitably, and the production of gold is on the increase in every continent of the world. In 1895 it produced 16 over $200,000,000 and it is now confidently predicted by the best authority t the world’s production will amount to over $300,000,000 in the year 1900. 1 say that in view of these incontestable facts it would be, for this reas the height of folly for this Government to abandon the gold standard ; and view of all the reasons which 1 have given, it would be a crime against civilizat for this great country to commit such a folly. Mr. Chairman, I will not trespass further on the time of the Committee. T] question, so vital to the public welfare, is one of absorbing interest to me. I hope my patriotism is sufficiently broad to embrace the whole country, bu' admit that lam provincial in my sympathies and aspirations. When Hook acr the Potomac I see a land whose sad memories and glorious history are dear to heart. How we have struggled to bring the States of the South into the cons lation of the Union with undiminished honor and dignity ; how we resisted, tj effort to reverse the order of civilization through the means of universal ne suffrage ; how we persisted until the last vestige of Federal interference in local affairs has been removed ; how we have labored to achieve commercial libe for the whole country ; and how, with the co-operation of our friends in Northern States, we at last built up a great national party, will make one of brightest pages in American history. I fondly believed the hour had come wfy no obstacles would stand in the way of unsurpassed prosperity for our peopl It seemed to me that the difficulties in the way of the development of . marvelous resources had all disappeared. It was then, in the zenith of our ho that this silver question, like a bird of evil omen, came into our horizon to db our councils, to blight prosperity and engender ‘bad blood, and to entail del and disaster on our party. How singular it is ! We have coal and iron, and g and copper, and limestone and marble, and timber, and all the products a fru ful soil can yield — in short, everything but silver — and silver is the cause of dissensions ! I would turn from the spectacle in despair if I did not believe t South would come out of the discussion on the side of good government sound money. Our people will soon see that this measure which comes to us fr the Senate is the work of the silver-mine owners, who represent a very sm" fraction of the American people. When they take into consideration that th are ten silver-mining States, which have twenty Senators in the other end of tj Capitol and only fourteen Eepresentatives in this, and that New York has thirtf four Representatives here and only two Senators there, and when they receive tl intelligence of the great majority which this House will record against tlj measure, they will see that the American people are in no humor to commit tl? stupendous folly. * Sir, so far as I am concerned, I would, for their good name and their prosperi rather vote against this measure and trust to the future to vindicate the rigb eousness of my action and the integrity of my motives than to give it my supp and secure thereby a seat on this floor for the remainder of my life. I intend stand in the breach and warn the constituency I represent against the impendit danger to their prosperity, even though I may there find my political gra [Great applause.]