YALE
UNIVERSITY LIBRARY

•^

BRYAN'S
CURRENCY CREED.

A FILL EXPOSURE OF HIS ECONOMIC
VAGARIES.

Extracts from His Congressional Speeches,
Accompanied by Appropriate Comments.

MR. BRYAN IS A GREENBACKER.

His Fundamental Principle : The Value of the Dollar is
Appreciating ; It must be Depreciated.

HE ADVOCATES SILVER MONOMETALLISM.

Blessings of an Unlimited Paper Currency when issued
by the Government.

NO BANKS OF ISSUE, STATE OR NATIONAL.

Sumptuary Legislation the Ultimate Remedy for
Financial Depression.

it matters not which of the two is called the standard. But it
rarely happens that both are of the same intrinsic value. If not
of the same intrinsic value, one or the other must be the standard.
The only reason for objecting to a gold standard is a preference
for a silver standard. The reasons why a silver standard is pref
erable to a gold standard require statement.

The Battle of the Standards.
August 16, 1893. — " If a single standard were really more desirable than
a double standard, wo are not free to choose gold, and would be compelled
to choose silver. * * * Silver as a promise to pay gold is little if any
better than a paper promise to pay. If bimetallism is impossible, then we
must make up our minds to a silver standard or to the abandonment of
both gold and silver."
There is no such thing as a double, standard of value, and there
can not be. If we have two standards which are capable of iden
tical conversion into each other, they together constitute a single
standard; but if we have two standards which are 'not capable of
identical converpion, or of mutual reduction to a common basis,
one of the two will be in use and the other abandoned. The
experience of the United States, under the attempt to maintain a
double standard, has demonstrated that gold at one time and at
another silver has been the practical standard of value— but always
the cheaper metal, whichever for the time that happened to be.
Bimetallism without the concurt'ence of ^sufficient number of
the great commercial^ations' of the worI3~is impossible: Whether
it would be possiI)le with their concurrence is a matter of specula
tive opinion; but that question does not enter into the present
controversy. Why we are not free to choose gold as the standard is not
apparent. Free coinage of silver would undoubtedly compel us to
choose silver.
At present the silver dollar is, in the words of Mr. Bryan, a
virtual promise to pay gold; and in that light he must regard it
as "little, if any better than paper." Paper is good, so long as
the credit of the government is good, and so is silver. If neither
paper nor silver is redeemable in gold, silver, at the present market
price of bullion, is 53 cents better than paper.
Bimetallism "without waiting for the consent of any other
nation upon earth" being an impossibility, Mr. Bryan admits his
preference for the silver standard; but in the words "or to the
abandonment of both gold and silver" he clearly implies that he
would be willing to try the experiment of an irredeemable paper
currency. That irredeemable treasury notes are capable of fulfill
ing both functions of money, as a standard of value and as a
medium of exchange, is the exploded greenback heresy. The
necessary inference is that Mr. Bryan is at heart a greenbacker.
3

The Debtor's Option.
August 16, 1893.—" The option is always given to the debtor in a double
standard." To give the debtor the option to pay in gold or silver, when
gold and silver-are at par with each other, is honest. But to give
the debtor this option, when a silver dollar is worth little more
than half as much as a gold dollar, is an obvious fraud upon the
creditor. Payment of Debts in Gold or Silver.
Febkuaky 27, 1894.—" There is no bimetallism which gives the option
to the noteholder. Bimetallism always gives the option to the debtor."
In a sense this is true. But the bimetallic theory proceeds upon
the hypothesis that gold and silver coin of the same denomination
are and shall remain of the same value. It does not contemplate
any such difference in value between the two as now exists between
the American gold and silver dollars. The name of bimetallism
cannot be invo'ked in favor of repudiation.

Limiting the Supply of Money.
June 5, 1894. — " Some who are ready to use the power of the Govern
ment to limit the supply of money in order to prevent injustice to the
creditor, are slow to admit the right of the Government to increase the
currency when necessary to prevent injustice to the debtor."
The immediate effect of free coinage of silver would be to con
tract the currency; ultimately it would inflate the currency. The
only manner in which inflation could "protect the interest of the
debtor" would be by enabling him to scale his indebtedness and
make a settlement with his creditors in depreciated money. But
Mr. Bryan elsewhere has said that the effect of free coinage would
be to raise the price of silver bullion in the market to $1.29 per
ounce in gold.
Both of these statements can not be true. The silver dollar
can not at once appreciate and depreciate in value. This is the
fatal dilemma which forever confronts the advocates of free coin
age at a false ratio. Free Coinage and Exports.
August 16, 1893.—" If our gold goes abroad, Europe wUl have more
money with which to buy our exports— cotton and wheat, cattle and hogs.
If, on the other hand, we adopt gold, we must draw it from Europe and
thus lessen then- money and reduce the price of our exports in foreign
markets. This, too, would decrease the total value of our exports and
increase the amount of products which it would be necessary to send abroad,
to pay the principal and interest which we owe to bondholders and stock
holders residing m Europe.

Mr. Bryan ignores the fact that imports al-e paid for with ex
ports, and that the money required to be shipped abroad on
account of importations is only so much as is needed to make up
the deficit when the balance of trade happens to be against us.
Europe needs no more money than she has to buy of us what she
wants, and she would not buy any more if she had more money
than she has. No political economist of reputation has ever taken
the position that it is advantageous to any country to adopt an
overtrading policy calculated to drive money out and put it in
the hands of a commercial rival. Besides, the avowed purpose of
free coinage of silver is to make money plenty at homo. It
can not have two opposite effects at once. It can not make money
plenty here and plenty abroad at the same time.

Mr. Bryan's Notion of an Honest Dollar.
August 16, 1893. — " If I borrow a thousand dollars to-day, and next
year pay the debt with a thousand dollars which will secure exactly as
much of all things desirable as the one thousand which I have borrowed, I
have paid in honest dollars. If the money has decreased or increased in
purchasing power, I have satisfied my debt with dishonest dollars."
Debts are not paid (as a rule) with money, but with property
of some sort, including bank credits with property. The value of
the property sold, for which payment must be made, is estimated
in dollars and cents ; so is the value of the property given in ex
change for it. In ninety-five per cent of the transactions between
American citizens no money changes hands. If payment is not
deferred, the problem is simple, so long as both parties to the
bargain measure the value of their respective properties by the
same standard. But if payment is deferred, the element of per
petual fluctuation in values gives a certain speculative flavor to the
transaction, which cannot be avoided.
If payment were made in wheat, instead of in money, this
would still be true. A farmer borrows one thousand bushels of
wheat from his neighbor one week ; next week he returns it ;
meanwhile it may have have risen or fallen in value one-eighth of
a cent a bushel. Nevertheless, if the lender agreed to take one
thousand bushels of wheat in satisfaction of the debt, the farmer
who returns exactly as much wheat as he borrowed cannot be
branded as dishonest, and his wheat is honest wheat.
According to Mr. Bryan's view, an honest dollar is an impos
sibility, since it is clearly impossible that any dollar should "se
cure exactly as much of all things desirable" in two successive
years. The inference would be, that there is no such thing as
honesty among men. But, taking his definition of an honest dol
lar, the dollar which comes nearest to being an honest dollar is
the gold dollar, for the value of gold fluctuates less, in relation to
the value of all other commodities, than does silver.
This definition of an honest dollar is inaccurate and mislead-

ing. It was Invented to escape the force of the observation that
the man who borrows money every dollar of which is worth one
hundred cents in gold, and repays his debt with dollars worth only
fifty-three cents in gold, is not an honest man. It is a contempti
ble and unsuccessful evasion of the issue.
An honest dollar is a dollar whose value, after the removal of
the government stamp upon it, is. the same as before such
rernovai; or, if not of the same intrinsic value as bullion, one
which the government undertakes and is able to maintain at par
with everj other dollar upon which it puts its official stamp.
The Dishonest Gold Dollar.
August 16, 1893.—" I denounce that child of ignorance and avarice,
the gold dollar under a universal gold standard, as the most dishonest dol
lar which we could employ. I stand upon the authority of every inteUigent
writer upon political econonay, when I assert that there is not and never
has been an honest dollar. An honest dollar is a dollar absolutely stable
in relation to all other things."
If instability constitutes dishonesty, how can the gold dollar
be, the "most dishonest dollar" which we could employ, when
the silver dollar is still more unstable?

Value of the Dollar Determined by the Volume of Currency.
June 5, 1894. — " The value of a dollar depends Upon the number of dol
lars." * * * "It can be asserted, without fear of contradiction, that
under similar conditions an increase in the volume of the currency will
decrease the value of the dollar as measured by other kinds of property,
and that a decrease in the volume of currency will cause an increase in the
purchasing power of the dollar."
The value of the gold or silver bullion in a dollar depends upon
the amount of bullion in the world — upon the abundance or
scarcity of the precious mttal from which dollars are coined. The
amount of bullion is the same, whether it is coined or uncoined.
The only way in which coinage can affect directly the value of the
dollar is by creating a sufficient supply of them, when the number
in circulation is insufficient to serve the demand of trade and com
merce for money as a medium of exchange. An extra supply of
dollars not in circulation, however, does not affect the value of the
dollar, because it has, in that case, the ])recise value of the bullion
contained in it. Money, as money, may command a premium
when scarce ; but an over-supply of money "will not result in its sale
at a discount from the bullion ])rice.
How to Prevent Metallic Money from Appreciating.
^i. .'^^^^ ^' 1894.-" Whenever the time comes, therefore, if it ever does,
that the people must choose between a constantlv appreciating metaUic
money and an irredeemable paper money which gives a hope of relief, they
6

will choose the latter system, with all its defects and dangers. The choice
may be avoided for the present by the full and immediate restoration of
silver to its place as a co-ordinate part of the metallic money of the world.
Later, if that is not sufficient to secure stability in the monetary unit, it
may be wise to prevent the use of gold and silver for any purpose except
ing coinage."
In order to prevent the appreciation of gold and silver coin, it
will be necessary to check the decline in prices of commodities
resulting from their greater abundance in consequence of increased
production, and this end cannot be attained except by arresting
the progress of discovery and invention. Unless this can be done,
Mr. Bryan intimates that he is in favor of an irredeemable paper
currency, " with all its defects and dangers."
His conception of sound finance begins and ends in the idea
that "stability in the monetary unit" is the foundation and the
indispensable postulate of commercial justice. This stability, he
imagines, can be secured, first, by the free coinage of silver ; or,
failing that, second, by an irredeemable paper currency ; or, in
the last resort, by ' ' preventing the use of gold and silver for any
purpose excepting coinage." His ultimate remedy for insta
bility in the monetary unit would be sumptuary legislation. But
it would be justified, in his opinion, by the necessity for a per
petual depreciation of the currency, in order to keep pace with the
falling prices of commodities, due to better methods of produc
tion. Because inflation of the currency means depreciation of the
currency, he is in favor of inflation; and, if free coinage does not
sufficiently depreciate the gold as well as the silver dollar, he
'would bring down the price of gold and silver bullion by forbid
ding their employment in the arts.

Demand and Supply Considered with Reference to Coinage.
August 16, 1893. — " There is not enough of either metal to form the
basis for the world's metallic money; both metals must therefore be used as
full legal tender primary money. There is not enough of both metals to
more than keep pace with the increased demand for money; silver can not
be retained in circulation as a part of the world's money, if the United
States abandons it."
The stock of coined gold in the world is about equal to that of
coined silver; the amount of each is estimated to be four billions.
Of the $4,000,000,000 of coined silver, $3,500,000,000 is full legal
tender in the country where coined. Of $625,000,000 of coined
silver in this country, $550,000,000 is full legal tender; the $75,-
000,000 which is limited tender is subsidiary coin, of light weight.
Both metals are thus shown to be in actual use as " full legal tender
priniary money." No one has proposed that the use of silver as
"primary" money shall be abandoned.
The world is estimated to have added $180,000,000 (or 4|^ per
cent) to the existing stock of gold in 1894; and $216 000,000 (or
5,4 per cent) to the existing stock of silver. The stock of gold
7

and silver is therefore increasing at a more rapid rate than the rate
of increase of population.
The United States added $64,000,000 (or nearly 10 per cent) to
its stock of silver in 1894; and $39,500,000 (or 6.4 per cent) to its
stock of gold. The annual rate of increase of population, from
1880 to 1890, was less than 2^ per cent.
The statement that "silver can not be retained in circulation,
as a part of the world's money, if the United States abandons it,"
is wild. The United States has no intention of abandoning it.
Refusal to coin silver at a false ratio, on account of the owner,
can not fairly be so construed. But if there were never another
silver dollar coined in this country, even on account of the Gov
ernment, this would not stop the coinage of silver elsewhere; nor
would it wipe out of circulation the $4,000,000,000 of silver now
current in the channels of commerce.

Free Coinage Would Make the Silver Dollar Worth
loo Cents in Gold.
August 16, 1893.—" We can, in my judgment, maintain the parity at the
present ratio. We believe, in other words, that the opening of our mints to
the free and unlimited coinage of gold and silver would immediately result
in restoring silver to the coinage value of 11.29 per ounce, not only here,
but everywhere."
This is precisely what most people familiar with the subject do
not believe. Because they do not believe it, they oppose free and
unlimited coinage at this ratio; Mr. Bryan's belief, or their dis
belief, will not change the fact. If he had given his reasons for
the faith which is in him, it would have been possible to examine
and pass upon them, but he gives none.
The reasons for disbelieving that silver "not only here but
everywhere" will rise in the market to $1.29 per ounce, are cogent,
if not conclusive. The stock of silver in the form of coin in the
world is estimated at more than $4,000,000,000 (four billions).
The addition of f^ to the value of this coined silver means
the creation of value to the enormous amount of $3,735,227,388.
In addition, the stock of silver uncoined, which it is impossible to
estimate, would have to be doubled in value. It is safe to say
that Mr. Bryan wishes to be understood to assert that the United
States, without waiting for the consent of any other nation, can,
by a simple act of legislation, create value amounting in the aggre
gate to more than twice the valuation of the entire stock of coined
silver in the world. If this result should follow, it might well be
said that the age of miracles has not passed away, and that the
alchemist's dream was a prophetic vision of unrealized possibilities.
But if it were true that the price of pure silver, under the ex
pansive influence of free coinage, would advance to $1.29 per
ounce, and that the bullion in a silver dollar would "immedi
ately" be worth 100 cents in gold, instead of continuing to be

worth (as now) only 53 cents in gold, how would this legislation
benefit the debtor class, whom Mr. Bryan regards as having rights
superior to those of their creditors, and who, as he tells us, should
be preferred to them ? If the gold dollar is a dishonest dollar,
because it has appreciated in value relatively to the prices of the
various commodities for which it can be exchanged in trade, does
Mr. Bryan think it ethically right to bring about such an enor
mous appreciation in the value of the silver dollar also ? And
what would be the effect upon prices of the creation of eight or
ten billions of value at one fell stroke ? Would not the inflation
of prices which would ensue be more fictitious than real ? And
would not such sudden inflation induce an era of speculation such
as the world has not yet seen, the results of which would be dis
astrous beyond the power of the human imagination to conceive?
Free coinage is supposed to be in the interest of debtors ; but
if free coinage should " immediately result in restoring silver to
the coinage value of $1 .29 per ounce, not only here but every
where," it would not have the effect of scaling indebtedness by
one penny, and the hopes of those who fancy that it would are

Why, Under Free Coinage, the Price of Silver Bullion
Would Rise.
August 16, 1893. — " That there could be no difference (in value) between
the dollar coined and the same weight of silver uncoined, when one could
be exchanged for the other, needs no argument."
There is no difference in purchasing power between the silver '
dollar coined and the gold dollar; yet the quantity of silver
(371 J grains) in a silver dollar uncoined is not worth a gold dollar.
It is worth only j^^\ of a gold dollar. How would free coinage of
silver make it worth any more?
Mr. Bryan has not in his mind the difference in value between
371;^ grains of pure silver (the silver "dollar") and 23.22 grains
of pure gold (the gold "dollar"). The value of the silver dollar
and that of the gold dollar being different, the question arises,
whether Mr. Bryan means to say that 371^^ grains of pure silver
could be exchanged for a silver dollar, or that it could be ex
changed for a gold dollar. If by "the dollar coined" he means
a silver dollar, all that he asserts is that the owner of the bullion
would get his bullion back, without charge, assayed, minted, and
stamped ; this no one denies. But the stamp on the silver dollar
is nothing more than a certificate of its weight and fineness ; it is
not, properly speaking, a certificate of value, and it adds nothing
to the previous value of the same silver uncoined. If, on the
other hand, he means that 371^ grains of pure silver, after being
minted, could be exchanged for a gold dollar, it devolves upon
him to prove the assertion. It certainly could not, unless the
bullion in the silver dollar could be exchanged for a gold dollar
9

before minting. It is incredible upon its face that the mere act
of coining should possess the mystical potency attributed to it and
be able thus to transmute values.

The "Natural" Ratio.
August 16, 1893.—" No change in the ratio can be made with fairness
or intelligence, without first putting gold or silver upon a perfect equality,
in order to tell what the natural ratio is."
By "equality" Mr. Bryan means that both metals must be ad
mitted to the mint for coinage, on the owner's account and at his
demand. By " natural " ratio he must be supposed to mean the
commercial ratio. The commercial ratio will, he thinks, be
materially affected by the demand for bullion for the purpose of
coinage. This is perhaps doubtful; but it is certain that, while
both metals were admitted to the mint, from 1792 to 1873, the
ratio fluctuated between 15.17 and 16.11, which proves that not
even free coinage is able to maintain that stability of purchasing
power which Mr. Bryan regards as essential to honesty in the sil
ver dollar.
The demand that free coinage of silver shall be re-established
in advance of the determination of the coinage ratio is an evasion
of the issue. The opponents of free coinage at 16 to 1 insist that
free coinage shall not take place at any but the commercial ratio-
Mr. Bryan replies that without free coinage at 16 to 1 the com.
mercial ratio cannot be ascertained. This is not true.

The Money of the Constitution.
August 16 1893.— "Can we afford to abandon the constitutional
right to pay in either gold or silver?"
There is not a line in the Federal Constitution in which this
right is conferred or asserted. The only reference to silver in the
Constitution is found in Article I, section 10, where it is declared
that "No state shall make anything but gold and silver coin a
tender in payment of debts." Therefore, the Constitution does
not in any manner take silver under its special protection.
Section 8 of Article I gives Congress the right "to coin money,
regulate the value thereof and of foreign coins." There is no di
rection for the use of any particular metal as coin, and Congress
may, at its own pleasure, decree the coinage of any metal or of
none. Commerce and Population.
August 16, 1893.-"A silver standard would make us the trading center
of all the silver-using countries of the world, and these countries contafn
far more than one-half of the world's population." ^""niries contain
Suppose they do ; what is the pertinence or relevancy of this
10

remark? What have they to sell, that we want, in comparison
with the more highly-civilized nations of the earth ? In compari
son with these nations, what will they buy of us V The value of
foreign trade is not measured by population. And if it were,
Napoleon's shrewd observation is to the point: That, since the
invention of the steam engine, the "iron men" in each nation
must be taken into account in estimating relative i)opulation. It
is not the number of inhabitants, but their aggregate productive
capacity and the number of their artificial wants, which makes the
trade of any given community valuable. Apply this test to the
silver-using countries of the world, and what would we gain by
substituting them for our present customers, who now pay for our
surplus products in gold? Nor could we compel them to buy of
us if we would. The Cost of Mining.
August 16,1893. — "No calculation can be made as to the profits of
mining, which does not include money spent in prospecting and in mines
which have ceased to pay, as well as those which are profitably worked."
This would be to apply to mining a rule applied to no other
industry in the world. It would be impossible to take any busi
ness whatever and calculate how much has been lost in the aggre
gate by those who have engaged in it without success.

Redeemable and Irredeemable Paper.
June 5, 1894. — " There are two kinds of paper money, namely, redeem
able and irredeemable paper. Redeemable paper has two advantages of
special importance. It conforms to the prejudice of mankind in favor of
metallic money, and retains their confidence in the money as a medium of
exchange." The implication in this assertion is that the greater confidence
which mankind in general feel in redeemable paper is a "preju
dice," which Mr. Bryan, who is superior to the ordinary weak
nesses of human nature, does not share. Irredeemable paper
would be good enough for him.

Opposed to All Banks of Issue.
June 5, 1894.—" It is said that we must institute banks of issue in order
to put money into circulation. I answer that there is a better way. The
issue of money by the Government directly to the people gives us a safer
money and saves to the people as a whole the profits arising from its issue.
When a bank issues money, you must pay the market rate of interest in
order to get it; but when the Government issues money, the people save the
interest — if the money is afterwards called in, and they save the principal
also — if the money is kept in circulation."
The argument against banks of issue is stated by him elsewhere
in the same speech in the following words: "If the bank issues
11

money on credit, it is permitted to create value for its own advan
tage; if it issues money on deposited security, it receives the inter
est on securities, and at the same time uses a part of the money
invested in the securities." The Government alone, according to
Mr. Bryan, should have the right to issue paper money. He is
equally opposed to state and national banks.

How to get Paper Money into Circulation.
June 5, 1894. — " Numerous plans have been suggested for putting this
money into circulation. Some have an idea that a Government issue can only
put be forth by loaning it to the people, either directly or through the agency
of banks. . . Aside from the danger of placing so great a power in the hands
of a dominant party, there are plans more just and equitable than that of
loaning. The money can be used to pay the expenses of the Govern
ment. . . The tariff on some of the necessities of life might be reduced and
the deficit made up by an issue of money. . . Government paper can be
issued to pay -for special improvements which Congress may deem desira
ble. Harbors can be deepened and rivers can be improved in this way.
I have introduced a bill, now before the Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce, which provides for the issue of United States notes, like
those authorized in 1862 (now called greenbacks), to an amount not exceed
ing $7U,000,000 to pay for the construction of the Nicaragua canal. . .
There are other works of national importance. It we find that the currency
needs to be increased, and do not desire to reduce taxation, we can, by the
issue of a few millions a year, construct a ship canal from Buffalo to the
Hudson river. . . We might, by the issue of a few millions a year, connect
the Mississippi river with Lake Michigan. . . We can use any available coin
on hand to take up matured bonds, and replace the coin so used with paper
money. I have introduced a bill during this Congress to provide in this
way for the payment of the two per cent bonds now outstanding, payable
at the option of the Government and amounting to about $25,000,000. . .
Government paper should be issued in the place of national banknotes as
they are retired."
The idea underlying all this visionary scheme for increasing
the amount of Government paper in circulation is to avoid the
payment of interest. Unless the revenues of the Government are
sufficient to prevent the occasion for borrowing money, either for
current expenses or for paying the principal and interest of inter
est bearing indebtedness now outstanding ($850,000,000 in bonds),
the Government will be compelled to borrow money from time to
time in the future, as it has done in the past ; and if it proposes
to pay no interest upon borrowed money, it will find no capital
ists willing to advance funds to meet its' necessities. The notion
that $850,000,000 of interest-bearing securities will be surrendered
by their holders in exchange for non-interest-bearing treasury
notes, which would probably in the end be found to be irredeem
able, is crude and naive. But Mr. Bryan would not only keep
afloat the ^7 50, 000! 000 of Government paper now in circulation
and add to it $850,000,000 to " pay" the bonds outstanding ; he
would issue more paper, in unlimited amounts, for public im
provements. His opposition to the lending of money by the
Government is so mild, that it is not certain that he would veto
12

a bill authorizing Government loans to private citizens if passed
by a populistic Congress.
The policy thus outlined by him is a policy of repudiation of
existing obligations to the creditors of the Government, and of
inflation of the public debt to a point where national bankruptcy
would be inevitable. Bryan's Idea of Redemption.
June 5, 1894. — "If itis said that more coin will have to be gathered into
the Treasury to redeem these new notes, I reply that the Government will
need a less reserve for a given amount of paper money than will be required
by private banks. Our coin reserve is not now drawn upon, except for gold to
export, and when our patriotic financiers desire a new issue of bonds. When
ever the Government exercises its option by paying coin obligations in silver,
when that is more convenient, a much smaller reserve will be sufficient. So
long as the option is given to the note-holder, the Government is at the
mercy of any band of conspirators who may seek to attdck the gold reserve ;
for a small volume of redeemable currency, reissued continually, is suffi
cient to draw out in the course of time any gold reserve, however great.
We shall have no difficulty about our reserve, when we return to the prin
ciple of bimetallism and use the option of paying gold or silver in the
interest of the people."
Why would not the best and surest plan, to prevent " conspira
tors " from drawing upon the reserve, be to make the Government
paper irredeemable at once? And if the obligations of the Gpv-
ernment are payable at its option, in gold or silver, when silver is
worth only half as much as the coinage ratio would indicate, why
is not a silver reserve as important as a gold reserve? What will
become of the silver reserve, if "conspirators" attack it also?

Bryan on Repudiation.
August 16, 1893. — " Some of our Eastern friends accuse the advocates
of fiee coinage of favoring repudiation. Repudiation has not been prac
tised much in recent years by the debtor ; but in 1869 the ' credit stiength-
eningact' enabled the bondholder to repudiate a contract made with the
Government, and to demand coin in payment of a bond'for which he had
given paper, and which was payable in lawful money."
The retort, "You are another," has been popular in all ages,
especially with those who have no other reply to make to an accusa
tion. If it is said that whenever the government j^asses the limit
of its ability to maintain the silver dollar at par with gold it will
become a dishonest dollar, the easy rejoinder is that the gold dol
lar is a dishonest dollar. If it is said that to pay public or pri
vate indebtedness in depreciated currency is repudiation, Mr.
Bryan ventures to suggest that the demand for payment of Gov
ernment bonds in coin is repudiation. But this retort is even
more far-fetched and unwarranted than the other.
No bondholder, even during the dark days of the Civil War,
ever imagined, when he loaned his money to the Government,
13

that any party would ever rise up to assert that he must
surrender his interest-bearing evidences of indebtedness on the
part of the Government for non-interest-bearing evidences of such
indebtedness. When the greenback party took this stand the
democratic party opposed it. That Mr. Bryan is a greenbackei',
is evident from many of his published utterances, of which this
is one. If his words are to be taken in their obvious sense, he
would have the Government pay its bonds not in coin but in paper.
If by "coin" was meant gold, or money as good as gold, payment
in depreciated silver is repudiation ; but that is partial repudiation
only. Mr. Bryan is apparently in favor of complete repudiation ;
and to escape the condemnation which repudiation involves, he
seeks to charge the bondholders with a crime which on the part of
the Government he regards as a virtue.

Bryan on the Coinage Ratio.
August 16, 1893. — " In fixing the ratio we should select that one which
will secure the greatest advantage to the public and cause the least injus
tice. The present ratio, in my judgment, should be adopted. A change in
the ratio could be made (as in 1834) by reducing the size of the gold dollar,
or by increasing the size of the silver dollar, or by making a change in the
weight of both dollars. A larger silver dollar would help the creditor.
A gmaller gold dollar would help the debtor. It is not just to do either,
but if a change must be made, the benefit should be given to the debtor
rather than the creditor, ^et no one accuse me of defending the justness
of any change; but I repeat it, if we are given a choice between a change
which will aid the debtor by reducing the size of his debt and a change
which will aid the creditor by increasing the amount which he is to receive,
either by increasing the number of his dollars or their size, the advantage
must be given to the debtor."
Legislation in favor of debtors or of creditors, as a class,
would be class legislation and wholly unjustifiable. Questions
between debtors and creditors are properly settled in the courts;
and every court will hold that what is right for the one is right
for the other also. Mr. Bryan, therefore, did well to disclaim
advocacy of any change of the existing ratio. Should a change
be made at any time hereafter it can not and ought not to affect
contracts antedating such change.
But in advocating the unlimited coinage of silver bullion, at
the present ratio, for the owner and without cost to him, Mr.
Bryan does propose a change of the entire basis upon which busi
ness is transacted. We are informed by him that there are chree
ways by which the ratio between gold and silver can be altered:
1. The shrinkage in size of the gold dollar. 2. The enlargement
of the silver dollar. 3. Making a change in the size and weight
of both dollars. Either of these three methods contemplates a
nearer approximation of the coinage ratio to the commercial ratio
and is so far forth honest. If this approximation of the two
ratip^ y.ere carried to the point of identity, the change suggested
14

by him would be absolutely honest — provided that it is not retro
active in its application to outstanding debts.
This is not, however, the change which would follow the
adoption of free coinage at 16 to 1. There is still another possi
ble change to which Mr. Bryan made no reference in his speech,
namely, the shrinkage of the silver dollar. A silver dollar contain
ing 371;J grains of pure silver, worth 53 cents in gold, which never
theless passes current for 100 cents in gold, is an anomaly in
finance, unless explained. The explanation is simple. Fifty-three
cents of the current value of this dollar is visible; 47 cents of its
value is invisible, and consists in credit. Free and unlimited coin
age would destroy this credit. In advocating free coinage at 16
to 1, therefore, Mr. Bryan proposes to make the silver dollar
smaller — not to the eye, but in fact.
This would be a change of ratio in the purchasing power of the
silver dollar, as compared with a gold dollar, from 16:1 to 31:1.
To avoid this result Mr. Bryan gravely proposes that we should
do one of two things : double the weight of the silver dollar, or
else coin gold dollars half their present weight. Anybody can
see that one of these would have to be done, in order that identity
should be established between the coinage ratio and the com
mercial ratio.
Which of these two expedients does Mr. Bryan favor ? He
tells us that enlarging the silver dollar would help the creditor.
It would only help him by maintaining the present standard of
value. He also tells us that halving the gold dollar would help
the debtor. If so, it would be by a change in the present standard
of value. Finally, he tells us that he prefers the latter expedient,
'because the debtor has rights superior to the rights of the creditor.

The Price of Farm Products.
January 13, 1894. — "The price received for the great staples of agricul
ture in the United States depends upon the price in foreign markets."
The amount of silver coined in the United States will not
affect the price (in gold) in foreign markets; therefore, according
to the admission of Mr. Bryan, it will not affect the i)rice (in gold)
in this country. Free Coinage and the Farmer.
January 13, 1894. — "You can not help a farmer except by a bounty, and
no one proposes to pay a bounty on agricultural products."
Then, unless the free and unlimited coinage of silver at IG to 1
is in the nature of a bounty, it will not help the farmer. But if
it is in the nature of a bounty, it is contrary to Mr. Bryan's prin
ciples, for in the same speech he said: " I will not attempt to
justify a bounty on anything. I believe it to be indefensible in
principle and vicious in practice." 15

Charity and Justice.
January 13, 1894.-" The laboring men of this country, the Producers
of our nation's wealth, do not ask for benevolence. They simply demana
justice, that is all. They ask for the right' to labor where they wiU and to
enjoy the fruits of their own toil. With their skill and intelligence and
surrounded by the bounties and the natural rtsouroes of a country but
partially developed, they do not doubt that they can hold their own. Let
them rise and stand upon their feet; leave them free to achieve their own
greatness and to retain a fair share of the wealth which they create; give
them equality before the law, and they will ask lor nothing more.
By equality before the law Mr. Bryan meant free trade. At
that date he had not the free coinage of silver in his mind. Give
them free trade, and it was hi^ opinion that they would ask noth
ing more. They have tried free trade and they do not like it.
He now makes an entirely new demand in their name.
If free coinage means payment of debts at half price, to give
them this right would be charity. If it means payment of wages
at half price, it is not justice.
No Need for an Army or Navy.
January 30, 1894.—" Who is it most needs a navy? Is it the farmer
who plods along behind his plow upon his farm, or is it the man whose
property is situated in some great seaport, where it could be reached by an
enemy's guns? Who demands a standing army? Is it the poor man as he
goes about his work, or is it the capitalist who wants that army to supple
ment the local government in protecting his property, when he enters into
a contest with his employees?"
Would Mr. Bryan abolish the navy and leave our. seaports
exposed to foreign assault? Would he abolish the army? Does
he think that, when a strike occurs, the property of the concern
engaged in a contest with its employees ought not to be protected,
pending the decision of the questions in dispute? If not, what
can be said of this quotation, except that it is an insidious and
inflammatory appeal to the worst passions of human nature?