194 



CONGRESS, UNITED STATES. 



fore me, and which leads the van in favor of 

 specie payment, I find this admission, which 

 they are forced to make : 



Whatever policy might have been judicious before, 

 it is vain to talk of contraction now, when three 

 hundred and fifty millions of greenbacks and three 

 hundred millions of national-bank notes are em- 

 ployed unceasingly to keep the wheels of an extended 

 commerce in motion (page 8). 



" This, it seems to me, is almost if not en- 

 tirely fatal to their theory, and contradicts all 

 the arguments they have advanced to sustain 

 their position. It is an open admission on the 

 part of those thoroughly acquainted with all 

 the intricacies of the money-market that there 

 is not a sufficient amount of the precious metals 

 for use. This is virtually admitting the whole 

 question at issue. If the gold and silver in cir- 

 culation, or that can be brought into circulation 

 by legislative action, is not sufficient in amount 

 for the business of the country and the advo- 

 cates of specie payment generally admit it is 

 not then it is evident it does not represent 

 the value of the commodities of trade or prod- 

 ucts of labor, and therefore can neither an- 

 swer the purpose of a standard of value alone 

 within our country, nor a sufficient medium of 

 exchange. If the demands of commerce -are 

 such that as it expands in volume it requires a 

 corresponding increase in the amount of curren- 

 cy or medium of exchange in use, then it is ap- 

 parent that there is . something in the very na- 

 ture of trade and laws of exchange which will 

 not allow a continual shrinking in the nominal 

 value while the volume is actually increasing. 

 In other words, there is a strong tendency in 

 the natural laws of trade and commerce to 

 maintain a comparatively uniform price of prod- 

 ucts, even when it requires a strong pressure 

 upon the amount of the circulating medium 

 afloat. The theory of the contraction! sts or 

 advocates of specie payment, when reduced to 

 a nutshell, is this, that there is no reason why 

 twenty -five cents may not represent the value 

 of a bushel of wheat in New York as well as 

 $1.50, provided the prices of all other articles 

 of trade and commerce are reduced to the same 

 standard. I hope they do not desire this, yet 

 if their logic is true, then theoretically the iron 

 money of Lycur'gus, or the 'cowries' of the 

 Africans, may answer all the purposes of mon- 

 ey; but practical facts, and not theories, are 

 the things we are called to deal with at pres- 

 ent. 



"Apply the theory, then no matter how 

 correct it may appear on paper to the case as 

 it stands, and tell me what would be the 

 result. Suppose that by a reduction of the 

 currency wheat was reduced in New York to 

 twenty-five cents per bushel, and other things 

 to a corresponding value, when would the na- 

 tional, State, county, city, and individual debts 

 be liquidated? Does any one fail. to see that 

 we would be involved in financial ruin and 

 bankruptcy ? Sir, the evil effect would not 

 stop even here, for our civilization would feel 



the shock, our system of education and means 

 of spreading and increasing intelligence would 

 be crushed, and we would soon be gliding 

 backward toward a state of ignorance and su- 

 perstition. 



" I am aware that the advocates of specie 

 payment do not propose any such extreme 

 measure as this, but I do maintain that when- 

 ever we contract below that point which ex- 

 perience has shown to be the true and healthy 

 standard, we are so far cramping our energies, 

 and retrograding in a corresponding degree. 



" What inference, then, are we to draw 

 from these facts which experience is constantly 

 presenting ? Most undoubtedly that a healthy 

 and vigorous commerce requires an amount of 

 currency uniformly proportioned to the amount 

 of trade. 



" Having now discussed these points which 

 have a general bearing upon the subject of a 

 metallic basis, I approach directly the question 

 before us, which may be stated thus: 'Is it 

 sound financial policy to take such action at 

 present as shall tend to a moderate increase of 

 our currency ? ' 



" One point in this question I think ought 

 to be universally conceded, and that is, that 

 we cannot reach specie payment by a further 

 forced contraction without bringing great dis- 

 tress and probable bankruptcy upon our peo- 

 ple. Another point made evident by the late 

 panic is, that the amount of currency, as at 

 present arranged, fails to meet the wants of 

 the country, and that some change is necessary 

 to meet the present necessity. 



" To attempt a review of all the remedies 

 proposed would require more time than I can 

 at present devote to it; therefore I shall con- 

 fine my remaining remarks to the discussion 

 of but one or two leading propositions. 



"If 'taking action looking to a speedy re- 

 sumption of specie payment ' means any thing, 

 it means displacing a portion of the paper cur- 

 rency that gold may be induced to flow in by 

 the consequent increase in the value of the re- 

 maining paper ; or, it means fixing a day, not 

 far distant, by positive enactment, when the 

 Secretary of the Treasury shall commence to 

 pay gold for legal-tender notes. All other 

 methods proposed are but shifts to avoid the 

 responsibility of meeting the issue fairly and 

 squarely, and, although doubtless presented in 

 good faith, yet they are in effect schemes 

 which tend to ease the pain without assisting 

 in the least to cure the disease. There are 

 but three methods open before us: increase, 

 contraction, or resumption of specie payment 

 by simple operations of law ; and if we act at 

 all we must proceed in one or the other of 

 these plans. Any thing short of this is only 

 shifting the burden from one shoulder to the 

 other. It is admitted that contraction is im- 

 practicable under the present state of affairs ; 

 therefore we may dismiss this from the discus- 

 sion, for to argue that we can contract by ex- 

 panding is simply a perversion of terms. If ex- 



