HON. JOHN P. JONES, (continued 5)

As I have shown in greater detail elsewhere, by reference to the table of annual production of the metals, it will be observed that from 1803 to 1820, the production was in the proportion of four dollars of silver to one of gold; from 1821 to 1840 two of silver to one of gold, from 1841 to 1850 one dollar of silver, to one of gold, from 1851 to 1860 four dollars of gold to one of silver, from 1861 to 1865 three of gold to one of silver, from 1866 to 1870 two of gold to one of silver, in 1871 and 1872 one-and-a-half of gold to one of silver. Notwithstanding these extreme variations in the relative annual production the law of France constituted a ligature sufficient to hold the metals in line at the ratio of 15½ to 1, and this not for France alone but for the whole world. If that period does not offer sufficient proof of the power of law, under varying conditions of supply, to tie the metals together and keep them so, no degree of proof will suffice, for the vacillations of their relative production have been greater during this century than at any former period in the history of the world.

IS AN INTERNATIONAL AGREEMENT NECESSARY?

If that could be done by a nation with a population of 25,000,000 to 35,000,000, what difficulty could be experienced by a nation of 65,000,000 in accomplishing the same result? Yet we are told that international agreement is necessary to restore silver to its ancient right as a full-money metal. Those who suggest such an agreement forget that while this nation is a borrower of money, the first and principal nation to demonetize silver is the greatest money lender known to history. Is it for a moment to be supposed that the shrewd English creditor classes will enter into any agreement which will deprive them of the spoils of so delicate and ingenious a system of usury; a system not only not banned by law, but, on the contrary, having the special approval and protection of statutes, and the active support and approval of all the complaisant moralists, philosophers, and financiers of the age?

While they are dilligently gathering in the proceeds of this operation a diversion is kept up for the occupation and amusement of dilettant financiers and economists, by invoking a discussion of the ratio that should be maintained between the metals. The ratio is the pretext on which conference after conference has been called.

The advocates of the single gold standard contend that hostile legislation had no influence in effecting the separation of the metals, and that the reversal of that legislation can not and will not restore them to a parity unless the principal commercial nations of the western world join in the work of rehabilitation. As illustrating the force of law on the relation of the metals I will read a suggestive paragraph from the report of the Royal Commission of England (1886), Part I, section 192:

Now, undoubtedly, the date which forms the dividing line between an epoch of approximate fixity in the relative value of gold and silver, and one of marked instability, is the year when the bimetallic system which had previously been in force in the Latin Union ceased to be in full operation, and we are irresistibly led to the conclusion that the operation of that system, established as it was in countries the population and commerce of which were considerable, exerted a material influence upon the relative value of the two metals.

So long as that system was in force we think that, notwithstanding the changes in the production and use of the precious metals, it kept the market price of silver approximately steady at the ratio fixed by law between them, namely, 15½ to 1. Nor does it appear to us a priori unreasonable to suppose that the existence in the Latin Union of a bimetallic system with a ratio of 15½ to 1 fixed between the two metals should have been capable of keeping the market price of silver steady at approximately that ratio.

The paragraph quoted ascribes the effect thus produced to the bimetallic treaty of the Latin Union, a combination of Italy, Belgium, Switzerland, and France, entered into in 1865 for the purpose of maintaining similar conditions of coinage. But it will be observed that, so far as the ratio was concerned, precisely the same effect had been produced by France alone during the sixty-two years from the passage of its law of 1803 to 1865.

Not only did the French law keep the metals together at a time when the larger annual yield was of silver, but it kept them together when the larger annual yield was of gold. Had not that law been in operation during the '50's, when a flood of gold poured from the mines of California and Australia, gold would have fallen, as in early times it more than once fell, to the ratio of 1 to 10, at which but 10 ounces of silver (instead of 15½) would buy an ounce of gold. Thus the law of one country alone, a country then of not one-half the present population of the United States, held the metals together, so that to whatever extent gold fell in relation to commodities from 1848 to 1865, by reason of the large output of the mines, silver fell to the same extent, notwithstanding the enormous decrease in its production relatively to gold during that period.

What is claimed for law in this connection is not that it directly controls the relative values of gold and silver any more than of anything else, but that on the slightest separation of the metals there instantly arises, under the law of the double standard, a demand for the cheaper metal, while the demand for the dearer one is suspended. In this way the double standard accommodates itself to the law of supply and demand, which is admitted to be the governing factor in the determination of value. It is not contended that a small or insignificant country could keep the metals together, but all experience goes to show that a great nation like the United States would have no difficulty whatever in doing so.

So thoroughly are the advantages of the gold standard to the creditor classes recognized in England that the English Commissioners, who, for form's sake, have been sent to the several monetary conferences held on the continent, have never been invested by their Government with any power whatever. And it is but a few weeks since the House of Commons overwhelmingly voted down a proposition made in good faith by Mr. Samuel Smith, looking to the calling of a new conference, which was supported by petitions to Parliament signed by 60,000 persons not merely as individuals, but as representing large organizations of the toilers of England.

The ratio is not the difficulty. Those who wanted silver demonetized do not want it added to the money volume of the world at any ratio. Why then shall we wait? Macauley, commenting on the impregnability of intrenched prerogative, observed that if the announcement of the discovery of the law of gravitation had militated against the personal interests of any vested or privileged class, its general acceptance might have been long postponed. Shall we, then, postpone relief to the suffering industries of this country till we can secure from the privileged classes, from the money-lenders of the world, an agreement to cease their exactions?

No, Mr. President, we need not wait, and we will not wait. All that is necessary is to act, and so far as the rules of order and of parliamentary procedure will permit, we propose to act, promptly and decisively. The world can not expect the initiatory movement for any change to be taken by those whose interests are served by the continuance of present conditions. Such conditions being consistent with their own welfare, they find no difficulty in arriving at the conclusion that they are for the welfare of society at large.

The dogma that cupidity is a synonym for virtue will never fail to find ready converts among the beneficiaries.

CONCLUSION.

I predict that the restoration of silver to its birthright, Mr. President, will mark an epoch in the history of this country. It will place in circulation an amount of money commensurate with our increasing population. It will give assurance to our languishing industries that the volume of our circulating medium is not to continue shrinking, and that the tendency of prices shall no longer be downward. It will increase the wages of labor and the prices of the products of labor; it will reduce the price of bonds and other forms of money futures, it will lighten, but not inequitably, the burden of mortgages; it will increase largely, though not unjustly, the debt-paying and tax-paying power of the people. It will loosen the grasp of the creditor from the throat of the debtor.

By the remonetization of silver, money will cease to be the object of commerce, and will again become its beneficent instrument. Activity will replace stagnation, movement will supplant inertia, courage will banish fear; confidence will dispel doubt; hope will supersede despair.

The lifting up of silver to its rightful plane by the side of gold will set in motion all the latent energies of the people. It will banish involuntary idleness, by putting every willing man to work. It will revive business, and reanimate the heart and hope of the masses. Capital, no longer fearing a fall in prices, will turn into productive avenues. The hoards of money lying idle in the bank vaults will come out to bless and enrich alike their owners and the community at large; while the millions of dollars now invested at low interest in gilt-edged securities will seek more profitable investment in the busy field of industry, where they will be utilized in the payment of wages and the consequent dissemination of comfort and happiness among the people.

And this it will accomplish not for the United States alone, but for civilization. For it is not too much to say, Mr. President, that upon the decision of this question depend consequences more momentous than upon that of any other question of public policy within the memory of this generation. In a broader sense than any other question attracting the general attention of mankind it is a question of civilization. It embodies the hopes and aspirations of our race.

The act of Congress which shall happily solve it will constitute a decree of emancipation as veritable as any that ever freed serf from thraldom, but more universal in its application. It will proclaim the freedom of the white race the world over, it will lift the bowed head of labor, it will hush the threnody of toil. It will inaugurate the true renaissance—a renaissance of prosperity, without which industry, learning, science, literature, art, are but as apples of Sodom. (Applause in the galleries.)