Democratic Sentinel, Volume 3, Number 27, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 15 August 1879 — REEMELIN’S LOGIC, [ARTICLE]

REEMELIN’S LOGIC,

The Political Situation Scanned by a Veteran Observer. The Republican Party and Be* sumption. [From the Cincinnati Enquirer.] Inasmuch as the speech of the Hon. Charles Iteemeljn, delivered at the Democratic Convention in Springfield, Ohio, has produced so much consternation in Republican quarters, it is perhaps well enough to have the full text of the same. Herewith is a verbatim report: MR. REEMELIN’S SPEECH. Seneca tells usjthal “men must be educated in virtue and truth; vice and error they learn of themselves.” I shall, as always, bear this axiom in mind while I am speaking to yon, and address m 3 self therefore to what are at this time the more dangerous self-learued errors and vices prevalent in onr public life. I shall not cater to them by discussing before yon such unprofitable questions as whether business is good, and if bad, which party is to blame, but pass at onco to tho essential point whether those in power are pursuing a rightful policy from tho ethical standpoint as to money and finance. If they do, they deserve our support; if not, our opposition. On that issue we have a right to arraign them, while the merits or demerits of hard or easy times are always divided over society and its economic ways and means, and present questions hardly proper amid our political partisan discussions. That it is just now peculiarly difficult to find ourselvos to rights as to financial politics can ho denied only by persons iusnared in party prejudices, who do not see the deep shadows in which w« all stand. Such folks will also reject my statement that the main source of the tattered condition of the public will springs from tho vaci'l tions of our Government at "Washington. I will therefore present the opinion of a man standing out>ide.of our politics, who is one ,of tho best thinkers 'of Europe on money matters, A. B, Bischoff, of Basle. He writes in the last number of Hildebrand's Journal of Political Economy, published at Jena: “There prevails at this time in the United States on the subject of money such distractedness and unreliability that it is impossible to form a judgment as to the future money policy of that country.” These words express, as I think, no more nor lees than the sorrowful truth as to the p lineal situation among us. Against them stand the bold, unscientifically formulated assertions of the Republican party of Ohio in the fifth article of its plartform, as adopted at its lato State Convention, which I ask leave now to read to you: “The financial administration of the Government by the Republican party, in accomplishing the great work of the resumption of specie pavments, in restoring our currency to par value, in greatly reducing the burden of the national debt, in refunding a large portion of the same at a rate of interest one-third less than the former rate, thereby alone saving to the treasury $13,000,000 a year and enhancing the national credit to a standing never before attained, is a source of just pride to the Republicans of Ohio and deserves the warm approbation of the American people.” You see the impartial Swiss republican thinks very different from our partisan Republicans in Ohio. The free look of the Swiss thinker is angered by looking at the policy of our Government on money matters, while our Republican party politicians aro proud of it. Who does not recall to mind in view of this tho a . -.1 i,„ „ Rnhol ar’s pride by saying, “ Your pride smnei through your rags! ” Or am lin error? Has the Republican party really cSuse to plume itself? Is she, or, better said, are her leaders animated by good motives ? Have they really achieved what they claim? That’s the point of this election campaign. I ask, therefore: Is it true that the Republican party, or respectively its administration, has accomplished resumption; that our paper money has par value; that the burden of our national debt has been reduced one-third; that a saving of interest equal to $13,090,000 has followed; that the public credit stands higher than ever? Were these things tiue Democratic opposition would be unjustifiable; indeed, the elevation of Sherman to the Presidency would be but the logic of facts.

Let us now, with a view to clearness in this matter, place before us the actual situation in plain, truthful language. Wo have, according to Sherman’s own reports, $346,681,010 of greenbacks in circulation. They are a legal tender for all debts; their redemption is legally and actually in force; but mind! by the bi-metallic standard and redeemable only at New York and Washington. The option whether to pay gold or silver is with the treasury officers, and we have, therefore, both a limited as well as precarious resumption, and all under difficulties. We have next in circulation $350,000,000 of national-bank notes, which are now ; ncreasing daily at the rate of half a million. They are, by law, redeemib’e in greenbacks. As a courtesy to customers, banks and others pay gold or silver for them, but they can not he compelled to do it. Since there arc over 2,000 national banks scattered over tbe whole country, and tho notes of each never circulate near their homes, there is in fact no redemption at all enforcible by law, except with great delays and difficulties. We have besides in circulation $15,000,000 of trade dollars, whose final fate is entirely undecided and floats in tho air. Then we have about $50,000,000 of silver of various denominations. These coins are from 15 to 25 per cent, under gold coin par, and only the legal-tender quality holds them nominally at par in tho retail trade. We have also, partly in public, partly in pri--vate safes, as well as in public circulation, about $250,000,000 of gold. Of this metal no one knows whether it is to be minted down to tho silver standard or whether silver is to be lifted up to the gold standard. ■ There are also still out $15,574,727.12 fractional currency, that are redeemable only in our silver coins. Finally, we have $26,295,000 of certificates of deposit, that are redeemable only in paper money. And beside them, $17,780,000 in gold and silver certificates, payable as expressed on their face. Thp gold notes of the gold banks—s4,7oo,ooo —hardly come within our purview. They prove only that the regular national banks are not specie banks. We have accordingly about $760,000,000 of total paper circulation, unless we addthes6ss,000,0b0 of 4-per-cent, bonds, which are largely a circulating medium, which would make $1,415,000,000. And with it we have $315,000,000 of ■ metallic circulation. Bat we have neither a money unit, nor a unit of account, nor a fixed legal standard of value. Tell me, then, who is right—the Swiss objective scientific thinker or the Ohio Republican platform tinkers? That our valuta, as science expresses it; our waelirung, as the Germans say; our standard of value, as we have it, is not definitely settled, is undeniable. And it is therefore wind work, yea, I dare say it, it is fraud to talk of resumption on a par value while this is not legally settled. All our paying transactions are incomplete. We are still in the meshes of the money jobbers, and our condition is that of Italy, of which the Belgian delegates to the late Mint Conference at Paris said, nem, con., that it has no rightful basis and is violative of existing treaties. Resumption de facto is not then resumption dejure! And partial resumption is not full resumption 1 Business regulation is not a legal rule, because it establishes nothing, and every hour may bring a change. The relations of debtor and creditor, those of buyer and seller, are subject to accidents and they lack' the lawful freodom of action which complete resumption alone can give. To speak of resumption as accomplished, under such circumstances, is—salve venia—an impertinence. Please tell me what we have resumed on, and, I will retract mv harsh accusation. We stand before a dozen money questions, all unsolved. Full resumption will exist only after they are solved. We are even without a legal definition of the word dollar. France has tne franc, England the pound sterling, Germany the mark as unit of value and account, and every Judge can decide what is payment by the law of the laud. Here the debtor determines (if only “ dollars ” are mentioned in the contract) whether he pays in gold or silver or greenbacks. And it is not only presumable, but certain, that he will pay in the money or least value—perhaps in depreciated paper. More tnan “dollar” must be Bpoken or written in a contract to avoid misunderstandings and wrongs. The Republican party has industriously circulated the statement that the Democrats alone mean to disturb existing settled moneyed relations. But allow me to ask, Are they settled? Does not the Republican party itself Intend to QhMgottan? Sq^B9tpqrpQMtQ|Moß

the greenback And go to the national-bank note? Yea, I ask, can either party, or the country free from party, abide in present moneyed conditions? I ask these questions in all sincerity of sincere men of all parties: Are we to have monometalism or bimetalism, or a bond basis? These questions aifd their by-issues are still open; but that we oan not stay as we are is beyond contradiction. Neither the Republicans, nor the Democrats, nor the Nationals, nor the Socialists or Communists have plajied all their trumps. The “joker” is still out and unplayed. Light, light and light again wo need as to our money questions Neither party has spokeu its last word. The Republican’ lees than the Democratic. For five-eighths of our paper money resumption has not even been initiated, because no law exists placing national-bank notes on the specie basis. How dishonest is it then to talk of an accomplished resumption while the purpose is to steer finally for a banknote standard that has no specie basis whatever. That the main solution ta still in question will bet till more apparent to all when it is considered that the debts to the banks, and theirs to the public, constitute by far the largest amount of all indebtedness, and exceeds several milliards. This unsolved sphere is the coming struggle for real civilization in America. Their purpose is to abandon the greenbacks, redeemable and legal tender as they are, and to put in their place bank notes, whose value is still in doubt. How anybody that wants honest money can support this is incomprehensible to mo. It is the Republican party that is for irredeemable paper money, while the Democratic party of Onio proposos to make the legally-limited and redeemable treasury note the permanent currency of the country. As a comparative question, the Democrats are certainly nearer right The Republican direction is toward a money system that depeuds on the arbitrary will of several thousand bank officers, while that of the Democracy is to moneyed ways and means that depend on the will of our Federal law-making powor. There is danger of arbitrary powor in both, but least in the latter. With the banks, care of and for private interests is the motive to prudent management, but the free, largo view is wanting with them which statesmen alone possess, and which makes these, with the public welfare and the common interests in their eye, recognize it as their duty to rosist the eternal pressure after private advantages which is over pushing itself forward by those who aro interested in banks. To guard the land and the people against these special interests seems, as I think, at this time particularly indicated. The one wheel of the coach of state is already in the ruts of tho national banks, and it is oh the dangerous side. Is not, then, prevention a necessity ? As Seneca points out to us, in the quotation I read to you, tnere are vicious learnings that must be counteracted by light drawn from principles. A dam Smith gave to the world 100 years ago a hint how a people can distinguish their friends from those of private in teres is. He said, chapter 207: “The member of Parliment who supports every proposal for strengthening monopoly is sore to acquire not only the reputation of understanding trade, but great popularity and influence with an order of men whose numbers and wealth reuder them of great importance. If he opposes them, on the contrary, and siill more if he has authority enough to be able to thwart them, neither the most acknowledged probity, nor the highest rank, nor the greatost public services can protect him from the most infamous abuse and detraction, from personal i suits nor sometimes from real danger arising from the insolent outrage of furious and disappointed monopolists.” Who does not recognize in the first picture that of Sherman? Smith states the causes of his great reputation as a financier, and why he is now the advance Presidential candidate? And who does not understand the reasons of the detraction, of the personal defamation and insults heaped upon certain prominent Democrats, such as Thurman and Tilden? Millions npou millions has Sherman, as Senator, already turned toward ihe banks; he is still at it; their pay him with honors and emoluments. "" Mipce it as we may, it is still true that our finance is in tne hands of a man who is a splendid stock and bond jobber, of a higher, but in principle identical, type as Jay Gould, in which profit is the basis, but all higher ethical statesmanship is wanting. And I ask you, as hightoned Americans, whether you are willing to join the chorus for Sherman worship started in bank parlors and echoed back by party sycophants ?

Let us dow test closely how much, if any, is true,as to the other boastings of the Republicans. They ascribe to themselves all ment for the comparative success as to saviDg in interest and the public credit Let us again hear what an impartial man says. Neuman Spollart, one of the clearest heads of Europe, says: “The United States have been rescued from marasmus, or politico-economic disintegration, only through their natural resources; specially by the richest wheat and corn crop, a good cotton campaign and the so far largest exportation of petroleum.” The admirers of Sneiman, himself included, claim, on the contrary, all credit for him. With equal right might a man sitting up behind on a coach ascribe to himself the early arrival at a point of destination, when it was the strength and rapidity of the horses, the good road and coach that made it possible. It was, indeed, an embracing of an opportunity, both with the man who sat up behind us with BhermaD, which has indeed its merits, too. But whether the ufco of the opportunity was honest is another question. We need but to put it to let all see that the adoration of Sherman is very much an exaggeration, set in scene by the private interests whom he favors. He is the most dangerous inflationist of all the public men in the United States, and will never hesitate to disturb private business and to jeopardize the relation's of trade and industry, if it suits his purposes. A siving of $13,000,000 of interest is the bait with which wo aro to be caught It is a large sum, but that placed in view by those who proposed in 1872 to pay the national debt in greenbacks was still larger, it was $130,000,000. Why take two bites at a cherry? If throwing off interest is the criterion, then it is better to throw off tho whole thereof, and not one-fourth only. In such policies there are degrees of righteousness or unrighteousness, viz.: repudiation, forced loans, moral as well as immoral pressure on the creditor, and also the Tennessee plan of an ultimatum to tho creditor by the debtor that holds tho master position. Sherman lias kept up all the outer forms of financial deconcy. He has ever cried: “Prenez guard!” before he made the sharper passes; but he was sure to sti ike, nevertheless. The people are no more, as a whole, helpless as they were during the war; but there is now an insecurity in money that leaves but little option whether to lake 4 per cents, or risk all.’ Ho was gracious in allowing 4 per cent., for he might have had their money at 3—yea, at 2 per cent. Indeed, they would have invested it with him merely for safe-keeping, as they used to do with John Law in the last century. Indeed, the resemblance holds good generally. Law also had bis nominal par between different securities. He, too,- made each new scheme preparatory to a new issue, and adding bubble to bubble. Does not everybody see that the 4 per cents, are the facilities for future nationalbank issues, which will then have much leas security than these have now? The last twenty years of the history of America has brought to the surface numerous specimens of transient greatness. Who can count all the Napoleons, Wriiingtons, Talleyrands, Pitts and Neckers that had the cognomen “Greatest ”to their names ? Diana of Ephesus, Alexander, Charlemagne had to be satisfied with “Great!” Why should not Sherman then also pass for the greatest financier the world ever saw? He beats, in writing fifty quickly, even the “unjust servant” of the parable in tbe New Testament Shall we too worship him? Or shall we do, as Lanau tells ns, of his American host in the “Log Cabin,” who ‘ i * * » with uncrooked back, - Would not lie even with a finger’s bend. If the latter is onr duty, as I think it is, then we must say that pressing $600,000,000 new bonds upon the market whiie the standard of Value for the dollar stated in the bond is not fixed is dishonest! The real object on the part of Sherman in such transactions is to gather accomplices to his personal aims and to use small personal and corporate interests for his great ambition. But we may be told that “in finance there are no morals.” Well, then, let ns count by dollars, and hold Sherman to a full account whether he used his opportunity to the utmost And, with this inquiry before us, it must occur to all as strange that the new 4 per cent bonds bring in the money market nearly as mnch as the old 5 and 6 per cents. Doesn’t every one see that some equivalent must have been given for the reduction of interest? And so it is. -He has shortened the interest, but lengthened the time, and it means that the hands of the people are tied for thirty years, and that it can no longer decide whether the French rente, or annuity system, or the English 3 per cent consols, or the original American short time 5 per cent bond system shall be the policy of the land. And for whose take did Sherman play his game of political anticipation? Who else except the banks, whose recharter is at hand and who need the open and shut game between 4 wdfeeir tart sow TbtawiM

hare the back and forward dancing between bank oOtGB and bonds, at the pleasure of bankers, in which the business men of the land pay for the music. We must, however, also look up the expense account, so that we may know what these manipulations cost. Was it right to allow banks V per cent commission and three months’ time to pay them in when all these bonds could be sold without commission and for cash ? I know of no public reports where the profits of the banks are officially stated, but I can estimate them and state the amount found, to wit, $5,000,000 at least For further elucidation let us use the newest treasury statement In it we find that there were in the treasury July 1, $430,500,000. And to whom does the money belong? $ 5.126/76.77 belong to interest overdue. 66.3' 6,660 26 belong to bonds long called in. 2.070,077.13 btloi'g to interest overdue thereon. 17,180.60)1.00 belong to gold and silver certificates. 2 ),2!)5,000.00 belong to greenback deposits. 8,408,106.00 belong to outstanding fractional currency. 169,771,G60.00 belong to bonds called in for the new 4 per cents. I/,,331 957.56 belong to resumption and general treasury purposes. $•130,h'U.297.72 An immense sum of fugitive money that was flying from insecure private credit and business to a pampered public credit and to treasury strong boxes, secure as they wore believed to be against the ordinary roving tramps and tricky borrowers. Sherman smiled grimly at this flight of troasuro to his hands. Ho quickly announced himself for the Presidency. We might assert that all this money is improperly in the tr< asury, for an able Minister of Finance would have no surplus for any purpose; he would any way keep out of all such advanco politics and let liis payments follow quickly the receipts. But wo do not want to judge Sherman too rigidly. He himself, however, would not claim more than $30,000,000 for the public service There remain, therefore, $410,000,000, all money, that remain in the treasury, because it belongs to folks who can but won’t have it, and prefer toleavo it without interest, bec.ruso outside it cannot, as they think, be safely invested. On these $410,000,000 the United States pays interest on a corresponding amount of 4-per-cent bonds in circulation, which is $10,400,000. Deduct from this the $13,000,000 and it leaves $3,000,000 interest which is unnecessarily paid. The housewife that dished up salt pork and let the fresh meat perish has in Sherman her ?.l er ego. That Sherman did not for a single moment believe in the practicability of true resumption appears to me, knowing him for years and having observed him closely, an indubitable fact. He never understood that resumption requires, as precondition, a restoration of a stable standard of value, and that resumption, not redemption, was the point All hi 3 preparations prove this, and besides that he deceived himsolf as to the people. He believed them to be gold hungry, while they waited only the specie stand aid. They wanted a sterling dollar, a definite unit of account and money. Not redemption, but, redeemability, and it not under Sherman’s d fliculties, but with fac'l ties. Our population docs net consist of gold children, that want to hear it chink; but of business folks, who want a lawful money standard. Besides, Sherman misunderstood the people. e gathered gold and is now astonished that nobody wants it hv the roundabout way that ho provides. He was educated in pi btical economy in bank parlors, and never had the courage to’tell the many he served to their faces: *Yon must, resume pith the treasury orelse resumption i# an illusion and the specie standard an idle dream.” For the same reason has he walked and still wa'kt devious ways, and turned the whole thing into a bond operation instead of a lasting regulation of the money s'andard. That it required a constitutional solution ho overlooked, at least concealed it. Such an old bankman as lie has a butt against all straight roads. He does not feel secure, unless he can cover himself behind some groat special interest, and that makes him an intense partisan Ho knows such bodies are. grateful! The press controls or eetves them, as tho easemavbe! There tlie praises are dnueu muuu are me measure of value in parties. Sherman has always saved the banks; indeed he has subsidized them. The whole burden of so-called resumption, magnified as it has been by him, has been thrown upon the country’s Irarle. He was astounded when the groundswell came that rifted everything, and he would exclaim, with Schiller’s “Diver:” It was for my safety, for it raised me aloft. Sherman, still mistrusts things; he throws out suspicions against others to draw off the people’s eyes. His miscarried candidacy for the Governorship of Ohio showed bis mistrust, and Foster has to fight the battle for which Sherman was too cowardly. And, now, in conclusion, you must allow me to say a few words why, in my opinion, if I have satisfied you that the Republican party does not deserve your support, itisright thatyou should co-operate with the Democratic party. You know I would rather plead for an entirely E arty-free country than for a party rule of any ind; but the necessity of overthrowing the combination that now rides the Republican party and the country, and has ridden both saddle-sore, is so great that we must act with all who agree on this point Ido not regard the Democratic party as a close corporation. It is now, as I think, the proper rallying organ against those now in power. " And, being an opposition party, it is not bound to close its ranks rior its programmes. The party in power must have, as well as stand by, definite measures, and have an expressed policy. It is always exclusive, and often proscriptive. The opposition, on the other hand, while gathering and developing into an organism, have an open mind for all suggestions, and it must try them liberally, so that it may eventually settle upon correct final conclusions. To co-operate in such a development binds all who join in it to nothing more than this. There is, however, an insuperable reason why the elaboration of definite measures must be deferred until after the victory is won. If proposed before, it would be intrustiDg their execution to those that are opposed to them, who would either strangle them, or delay them, or carry Ihem out defectively. The opposition in England never introduced measures. Jackson well said that if he thought his right arm knew his intentions lie would cut it off and cast it into the fire. Tho Republicans were an open party until up to 1800. There is a tost, however, that ought to be applied to opposition parties. And I think no one can read the Dcmocraiic platform of Ohio without being satisfied that it is vastly superior to any which wo have had for years. The tendency is clearly the one from local prejudices to national intelligence, virtue and wisdom. All nationalism that does Dot moan this tendency is not only nonsense, hut wickedness, even if every letter in the word were written in capitals. Our gubernatorial candidate, Gen. Ewing, has correctly stated the situation. The Ohio election this fall is (whether we like it or not) a reconnoissanco in force with a view to next year’s Presidential contest. Tho Eastern Democrats have taken a liberal view of our action here. They wish us to win, and concede to us, as we to them, that each State must this year fight in its own way the common enemy. And why common ? Because tho whole Union needs tho removal from power of a party and an administration that is ever raising questions and never setthng any. Take civil service reforms, our foreign relations, our Indian policy, our military organizitioD, our judiciary, the pub' lie lands, the relations of the States to the Union, and last, not least, our money and finance. Where is there a definite solution? Where is there even au open avowal? Clear and divided in nothing, it deals only in false accusations against its opponents and hypocritical pretenses as to its own virtue. I think I have shown this in my argument on the special snhject of money and finance. It is the only point on which there are any exceptions taken to the ground that the Democratic party should be preferred to the Republican party. And I havo heard of no reason for thin except the one that the Republicans have at least done faithful work as to resumption. That this is untrue I have tried to proveto you. To me, who have for nearly half a century, both in public and private kept aloof, on the one hand, from foolish bnllionism, ard on the other from wild paper money, it is now clearer than ever that what I stated, as the repre • sentative of Hamilton county in 1851, in the Constitutional Convention of Ohio, in a discussion with Senator Hawkins (see volume XI, pages 406 412, Constitutional Debater), is still the correct principle, to-wit: that all power on the subject of money bring intrus od to the General Government, it is its right and duty to secure to the country a stable specie standard of value, and that no money should be issued not baspd upon it. That the Republican party does not stand by that principle is, I think, no longer to be denied. Their advocacy of bank notes that are not redeemable at the will of the holder tuts this their Ireacbcy to true money beyond qu •- tion. The Democratic party is at least for a currency that is now redeemable in spree de facto and de jure. What the national attitude of this our party may be next year I d > not know. I have given my reasons why I now c > operate with the party which I joined fortyseven years ago. These reasons satisfy me I hope they will satisfy you, and that soon this land and this people may be freed from their wor*t laoubjia—Republic**? party—whioh.

does not by any means embody the best republicanism in America. lam convinced that a large portion of this party, tired of Sheimsniem, wishes this liberation. In 1876 and 1877 the country was cheated out of its reforms ; let us see to it that the fraud be not repeated in 1880 and 1881. It is, I assure you, necessary to the highest interests of the American people.