Indiana State Sentinel, Volume 28, Number 37, Indianapolis, Marion County, 10 September 1879 — Page 10

SB N T F N; B Jj S U P P li E M B K T

GENERAL TOM E WING'S

Speech Last Tni&j at Gallipolis, Ohio 1 fiheraan and Sonars Squelched. : Equalization; Not Resumption Sherman vs. ; Sherman Free Elections National v . Banks Itadical Extravagance. Fellow Citizens About ten days ago two of the heads of departments at Washington illustrated civil service reform by tatting the stamp la Ohio for tbe Administration candl data for governor. They took my Lancaster speech as a text, and discussed snch parts ol it as they could most plausibly answer, and dodged the rest. In the pauses between other and previous engagements in the campagin I have examined tueir speeches, and now reply to them. DEMOCRACY NOT COMMITTED AGAINST MAINTAINING RESUMPTION. ' Mr. Schurz, who is relied on every year by the Ohio Bepublicans to shoo Democrats into Republican ranks by shouting "inflation!" repeats with some variation his specious and extravagant speech ol last year. He makes a frantic effort to prove that the success of the Ohio Democracy means abandonment of resumption and relurn to paper money not limited by red ee inability In coin, and, therefore, unlimited in volume; aud he thereupon groceeded to fight ns on the gronnd on which e places ns instead ol on that which in fact we ooeapv. Our platform says not a word against resumption; nota word for Irredeemable currency ; not a word for any increase of the currency, except that which will come from the unlimited coinage of the old silver dollar and the issue of certificates for silver bullion. But Mr. Schurz says, though a return to sn Irredeemable currency Is not expressly declared lor In the Democratic platform, it is necessarily involved in the proposition to substitute legal tender notes for National bans: notes. He reasons thus: The United States now has the burden of redeeming only the greenbacks In coin the National banks having to look after the redemption of their own paper. If we substitute treasury, notes for bnk notes, we shall thus double the burdens of resumption on the United States. That involves doubling the coin held for redemption purposes. But that coin reserve can not be doubled, because the coin can't be got; nor can it even be increased without increasing the punl c debt; and the Ohio Democracy declare against any increase of that debt. Hence, tha substitution of treasury notes for bank notes necessarily involves the abandonment of rexura pti -n and a return to an irredeemable paper currency. 1 his reasoning Is the warp and woof of the fabric of Mr. Scburz's speech. It is utterly fallacious, and betrays au astonishing ignorance either of tbe laws affecting resumption or of the intel Igence f tbe people sought to be Influenced by his fal.se aud dazzling rhetoric. Listen, now, my fellow Citizens, to this provision of tbe act of Congress of June 20, 1874, now In force: "When the circulating notes of any such (National oanking) association, assorted or unassorted, shall be presented for redemption in sums of 81,000, or any multiple thereof, to tbe treasurer of tbe United States, the same shall be redeemed in United States notes." This is ail the redemption there is, in fact, of National bank notes, because each bank is only bound to redeem its own notes, and no man can collect out of the general circulation any considerable number of tbe notes of tbe bank In his immediate locality. Hence, the United States, in effect, alone redeems the bank notes, and the same officer who redeems greeubacks in coin redeems bank notes in greenbacks Now, suppose yon want (1,000 in gold; you can only get it by presenting to the treasurer or sub treasurer of the United States (1,00 in greenbacks orin National bank notes. It makes no difference which yon peseut. Suppose.lfyou present bank notes and demand coin, the treasurer should say : "I am not bound to pay you in coin." Tour answer will be: "Then pay me in greenbacks." And when he hands you the greenbacks you will hand them back and say: "Now pay me in coin." Does not the United States therefore, in fact and effect, redeem equally green backs- and bank notes In coinT Is not the burden of furnishing the coin for tbe entire papfr circulation wholly on the United States? Would that burden be increased a dollar by substituting greenbacks for bank notes? There is no schoolboy In Obio who, on reading that law, would not see that both Mr Schurz and Mr.- Sherman are falsifying the facts when thev assert that the substitution of legal tenders for bank notes el' her increases the burden of resumption or impairs its stability. Yet on this shallow Invention is built almost the whole structure of their arguments on the money question against the position of the Ohio Democracy. The twin secretaries make meiry over my speeches in 1875 and 1877 against resumption, in which I declared that it was impracticable, ; and would result In "a general massacre of business." I can read those speeches now without being at all ashamed of the matter or the manner of them. They were spoken from conviction in view of the law and the situation as then exist 'ng, and in no spirit of extravagance or partisanship. Judging the law as it stood, my criticisms were sound. But subsequent legislation greatly changed the scheme of resumption. As it originally stood, it provided for the total destruction of the greenback currency. So Mr. Sberman admitted . on the day he introduced the bill - In the Senate. So Mr. Bristow declared in his report for 1875, saying that "the faith of the Government now stands pledged to the final redemption and removal fro.n the currency of the country of the legal tender notes as fast as tbey shall be presented for redemption." So Mr. Morrill declared in his report for 187K, In which be says that 'bv tbe resumption law Congress declared In effect a . monetary system composed of coin and National bank notes redeemable in coin." The scheme, too, not only involved the destruction of all the greenbacks, bat also contemplated redemption in gold alone silver having been stealthily demonetized in advance ol the resumption law. This was the programme of resumption when I discussed It in tbe speeches now criticised and ridiculed by tbese gent eaaen. But since then, and as a result of the agitation against the scheme by the Western and Southe n Democracy, and in spite of all the opposltlnofSherma , Schurz & Co., the destruction of the greenback money was stopped, ana (316,0u0uu0 of it saved from destruction. To the stoppage of this sweeping contraction of tbe currency the people owe the fact that tbeir business was only maimed by the resumption scheme not "massacred " Moreover, silver has been partially reraonetized by the efforts of the Wes rn and 'Southern Demociacy since my predictions ol the disastrous effect of the resumption scheme, and its certain failure enongu being coined to protect the gold In the treasury from baing drained off after resumption day. In a debate In the Senate on May 28. 1878, Mr. Blaine expressed ihe opinion common among the friends and the enemies of forced gold resum ption, when he said in the Senate: "Undoubtedly, the whole question of resumption b-a been changed by tbe coinage of the silver dollar. The secretary of the treasury may begin resumption to morrow with ten millions In silver, in my judgment, with perfect safety. For resumption in silver you have got plenty. For resumption in gold you have not got half enough." To this partial restoration of silver aud to three enormona crops in the Unied states, accompanied by three fail urea of crop In Europe, which have turned the balance of trade largely In our favor, Mr. Sn-rman owes tbe fact that he has so far equaled bis great prototype Sir Robert Peer, In reaching and maintaining resumption, while be bas far surpassed bim In the mis -ries lnfliced on the people in his march to bis bad eminence. WE HAVE EQUALIZATION, BUT HOT RESUMPTION. Not onl v has the resumption law been made by our efforts less disastrous by stopping tbe destruction t toe greenback currency, and lexe impracticable by tbe reraonetization of stiver and tne unexampled succession of large crops at borne and eager markets abroad, but It is also to be borne in mind that the result attained n n-t, In fact, resumption. Wehave equalization only, not resumption. Resumption, as promised by its advcaies and understood by tbe people, was the free circulation of golrt.n verand paper and tbeir interchange at all the bnk counters In the United States. There will be no r-8'impilon In fact nntil every bank In tbe United Slates receives deposits of coin and paper without distinction, any pays demands in either forms of money tbe holder may prefer Such Is not now tbe ease. Gold la uo more In general circulation now than It wan five years go. There is, in effect, none in the bank vaults. No man in Ohio can get (1,000 In gold without paying M a premium the coat ol expresses to and

from New York. A friend of mine tbe other day at Columbus a cito of 50,1)00 inhabitants, with a dozen banks wanted to get two 120 gold pieces as presents for his daughters, and went from bank to bank in vain to find them. Instead of resumption, the people have merely equalization of paper and coin; that Is, gold prices for their lands, labor and products; that is, (2.25 a hundred for their pork, 90 cents a bnshel for their wheat, and 75 cents to (1 per day lor tbeir labor with which to pay enormous and undiminishing taxes and debts, contracted when their products and labor were worth over SO per cent, more than they are to-day. It is true the money earned by a day '8 labor will buy about-as much as a day's earnings would have bought lour years ago. It is trne the money gt for 100 pounds of pork or a bushel of grain will buy about as much as the money got for the saue products four years ago Here is neiiher gain nor loss. But it is also trne that every man's debts aud taxes cost him In labor or products so per csu t. more to pay them now than four years age . ' The oeots of the country, public, corporate and private, running from -fou years ago, amount to not less, as I have heretofore repeatedly shown, than ten billions of dollars. This shrinkage of values results in compelling tbe payment of debts with 50 per cent, more of labor and property, and in effect adls five billions of dollars to the weight of that vast debtbuiden. our taxes, (National and local, amount, in tbe aggregate, to eight hundred millions of dollars each year. This shrinkage of values increases the tax burden one-half, or four hundred mi lions a year. That inc ease amounts to Interest at 4 per cent, on ten thousand millions of dollars, more than one-third of the present wealth of the country. Messrs. Sherman and Schurz adroitly and elaborately attempt to convince the people that there is vast gain In increasing tbe purchasing power of their money. I deny it. Tbe greenback of 1874 was precise. y as good for all tbe purposes of business In the hands of the producers and exchangers of wealth as tbe greenback of 1879. It is true the greenback dollar now buys 0 percent, more than It bought then, but it takes 50 per cent, more of wheat, pork, land or labor to get it now than then. There is no gain at all to the Industrial classes by tbis appreciation of the dol ar, which means mere y the lowering of prices of land, labor and products. When we consider the vast distress inflicted noon the industrial classes In the process of forcing prices down to the low gold level, and the vast addition to debt and tax burdens which are necessary consequences o that reduct ion of values, the pretended advantage of adding 50 per cent, to the purchasing power of oar paper currency is met by a set off of losses luO times greater than tbe wanted g&ln. The two secretaries think it fine sport to underrate and ridicule the Industrial d stresses and disasters which have strewn with tbe wrecks of lives and fortunes tue pathway to resumption. The fiddling Nero was once deliichted at a somewhat similar spectacle. I doubt if their fun will be shared by the masses of tbe people. The ore Diggers, the furnace men, the coal miners, the a ay laborers, and mechanics and tradesmen, and mortgagers and other debtors throughout Obio .have not found the cup of resumption and demonetization a cheering one. Distressful days and sleepless nights, scanty food and ragged clothes, lost homes and broken hearts have been tbe price of resumption to them. CONTRACTION AND THE PANIC SHERMAN VS. SHERMAN. Mr. Sherman attempts to make me appear ridiculous by asserting that I attributed the panic of 1873 to tbe resumption act of 1875. That is not a perversion of anything I ever said, but merely a puie Invention. I have always attributed the panic of 1873 in chief part to the contraction of the currency, which went on steadily after 1866, causing an expansion of credits to take the place of diminishing currency, whlcb credits collapsed In the panic But Mr. Shi rman says "the amount of paper mouey outstanding on the 30th of June, 1873, was more than it was on tbe 30th of June, 1865; the amount on the 30th of June, 1873, was (749,410,000, and on the 30th of June, 1865, was but (747,233,OJ0." I answer this assertion by quoting from his own report, issued from the treasury department on tbe 1st of July last, giving the "total amount of currency outstanding" at various dates, as follows: jane 30, 18R5 (933,318,000 June 30, 1873 750,062,000

Total contraction..... .......(233.256, 00 Showing a difference between Mr, Sherman's statement as secretary on the 18th of July and his statements as stump orator on the 20th of August of over (233,0O),0U0. But there are two kinds of contraction, both equally effective in shrinking values; one is by actual reduction of the currency ; the other by the growth of business, the currency remaining stationary. The demand of business for currency may be assumed to Increase approximately in proportion to increase of population. The actual currency in 1805, according to this treasury statement of Mr.i-herman, was 828 per capita, while the actual currency in 1873, by the same statement, was but (17.85 per capita, being a reduction of over onethird. Before the contraction of our currency our people and our cities and our counties were very little in debt, as sta'lstics and records and experience attest. With the contraction which followed np to 1873 came the expansion of credits to maintain business. The. enormous grants by tbe Republican party of public lands to promote the premature construction of railways combined with this expansion of credits to bring on the collapse of 1873, from which the country, as Mr. Sherman stated in his speech In the Senate in 1874, bad in effect recovered, when the demonetization of silver and forced resumption in gold set la motion tbe influences which have shrunk prices, paralyzed industry and confiscated the property of debtors and tax payers. Mr. Sberman asserts that not only had we more currency in 1873 than at the close of tbe war, bat tnat we now have more than we ever had. In this treasury department statement of tbe 1st of last July he gives tbe total circa ation at 743,801,000 on the 1st of July, 1879, which Is about (14.87 per capita, as against (17.85 per capita on the same day In 1873, and (28 on the same day In 865. This statement of the currency now outstanding includes (74,000,000 of greenbacks withdrawn fr m circulation and boarded in the treasury, and (125,000,000 which the comp roller of the currency in his speech to the National bankers at Saratoga last month says are boarded by the National banks. Mr. Sberman attempts to sustain his assertion that the currency is greater now tban ever by adding to the volume now afloat all the co'n in the treasury beld lor redemption. He might just as reasonably count the gold in tbe mountains. The coin will stay in the treas ury until the greenbacks are surrendered to take its place, and then tbe greenbacks will stay in until tbe coin comes back again. When one is circulating tbe other is hoarded, and both can't be counted as part of the circulation. Mr. Sherman now asserts that the panic of 1873 was caused by an Inflated and Irredeemable currency. But here is bis speech In the United States Senate, made on the lth of January, 1874, in which he says: "Mr. President, the condiiion of our currency has no relation whatever to tbe panic lb at has passed over tbe country. I never nave charged tbe panic upon tbe currency. Indeed, I was the first in the midst of the panic to declare that the currency had no connection with it. Money was secure. Men hoarded It These panics are but the ebb and flow of creat enterprises. No action of ours can prevent them " He now asserts that all the business distresses and blighted industries of tbe past four years were due to that panic, but In this same speech he declares tbat tbe effect of the panic was then ps. 1 quote his language: "Confidence is restored, and every commodity is advanced to tne price that it was before tbe panic " He now asserts that "experience has shown that the resumption act bas not produced any distress;" but In bis published examination before the finance committee of tbe Senate last year, wnich was care ally revised by him before it went to the public printer, be says: "We have now passed through all tbe agont and strugg'e for resumption " l'o crown the display of his characteristic versatility of assertion, Mr. Sherman ays: "Suffice it to say that every step under the resumption act bas bad a tendency to produce easy times, restore confidence, reduce prices, advance the values of ur currencies, and to lead us gently, slowly and surely to tbe sp-cle standard." l ould human initenuity combine In one sentence a greater Jumble of contradictions? It is perfectly true that every step toward resumption has tended to reduce prices, or. In other words, to advance tbe valr.o or purchasing power of monev ; but tbe assertion tbat a redaction of prices causes or ran be accompanied by "easy times" contradicts all human experience and all authority on tbe nature and office of money. Falling prioes have everywhere inflicted, and mast necessarily lnfliot. Industrial distress. There never has been a period in the history of this or any other country of falling prices, or. what Is the same thing, rising value of money, which has not been a period of distress of Indus tries and oppression debtors

and tax-payers. The reason Is obvious. When prices are falling, the goods o' the merchant shrink in value on his shelf; the stock of the trader is worth less when he gets It to market tban when he bought it; the manufacturer when he turns out his goods finds they have cost more lor raw material and labor than they will sell for; the farmer must pay debts ana taxes In products constantly shrinking In value. Money loaned in productive enterprises Is, therefore, withdrawn because the enterprises themselves become on prosperous and the loan hazardous; money flows from the veins and arteries of business and congests In the vaults of the hoarders. It is true "that every step under the resumption act has bad a tendency to re luce prices, and to lead us thus slowly and surely to tbe specie standard ;" and it is Just this steady and protracted fall of prices, caused by the resump tion law, of which the people have complained. Bat to assert that it has produced "easy times" is preposterous, unless easy times are those In which money shrinks from all Investment or loan in productive industry, while it seeks Investment in 4 per cent. Government bonds, or is loaned only on collaterals which can be converted Into money on a day's notice. HAS EQUALIZATION BROUGHT PROSPERITY ? The two secretaries bring to the people of Ohio tbe intelligence tbat prosperous times have come again; tbat all labor is fully employed and well paid ; every branch of manufactating industry prosperous; trade flourishing and that we all have reason to rejoice and be content with the present situation. I admit that some special branches of business are In better condition than before the Democracy stopped contraction and partially remouetized silver, but 1 can not learn of any general revival of business. Tne Iron Industries are specially quoted as reviving rapidly, yet a Pittsburg friend, who is nanutacturing iron, told me tbe other day that wages have not increased at all, and tbat there is a very large surplus of labor. Hanging Rock mill and foundry iron sells this year lower than last, and sold last year lower tban tbe year before. I saw hundreds of ore-diggers in Lawrence county last week whose average wages don't exceed 50 cents a day. The coal mined in tbe Hocking Valley one third of the whole product of the State sells on the cars now at 65 to 75 cents a ton as against 90 cents last year, (I tbe year before and (1.50 the year after the panio. - Tbe coal-diggers there now get 50 cent s a ton and half work, as against 75 cents a ton and full work in 1874, the year after the panic, and the year before tbe in dust ries of the country were put under the screw of preparation for gold resumption. Iron furnaces at Uhawnee and 0&-den, Steuben vllle and Ashland, rolling-mills at Stea benvlile, Marietta and Pomeroy, have recently been. sold at from a fourth to a sixth of tbeir cost. Bait which sold at tbe furnace at an average of $1.26 per barrel in 1874 now sells at 82 cents per barrel. The Iron, coal and salt industries of. Ohio, so far as 1 can learn, are paying, where best managed, only tbe cost of production, and that based on starvation wages counting their capital and investment as nothing. That Is the extent of the boom which is always gotten np In speeches and newspapers by the Republican party In its important campaigns. 1 believe it to be true that business generally in Ohio is almost as uu prosperous now as it was in 1878 or 1877; that tbe condition of debtors generally whose debts amount to one-fourth of the estimated value of tbeir property four years ago is n effect bopeless; that the burden of taxes increased througa fa len prices is almost intolerably oppressive: and I further believe that the people ought to and must have a rise of prices above the present low gold level before general prosperity can possibly return. THE RESTORATION C " SILVER. This relief is offered by the Democracy in the bill which passed the House of Representatives last session, and will unquestionably pass the Senate next sersiou, for the unlimited coinage of the old silver dollar and the issue of certificates for silver bullion. That act would cause an early increase of metallic money, or of paper representing and redeemable in metallic money, of from one to two hundred millions of dollars, followed by a yearly Increase of thirty or forty millions. This would raise prices very nearly to the old bimetallic level, lightening tbe burdens or debts and taxes, stimulating Industries, and bringing into play all the productive energies of our people, it is a great, wholesome, indispensable measure ol relief open to no just criticism, either in respect of Its honesty or sound policy. It will bring down tne purchasing power of gold, which has been dishonestly increased by the demonetization of silver an act to which the American people never consented done in the dark by some rascal for the purpose of robbing the masses and piling np the fortunes of the moneyed class. The two parties are squarely at issue on tbis question. Mr. Sberman and Mr. Schurz both take ground in favor of stopping the coinage of the silver doilar when the amount under existing law shall reach a sum supposed to be tbe largest which will float at par with gold: or, on tne other hand, adopting a new and more valuable silver dollar for tbe benefit of the creditor class. Either of these methods involves the perpetuation of the wrong inflicted upon the people by the secret and fraudulent act of demonetization. I tbank these gentlemen for their frankness on this great question, and call on the people of Ohio to decide by their votes whether our great American money product shall be put on an even par with gold, and whether they will have the old dollar of the fathers or the new dollar of the Shylocks. Mr. Sherman, who was the first to propose the demonetization of silver in tbe interest of tbe moneyed class, attempts to sustain It by the following statement: "Many causes contributed to reduce the relative value of silver, and now it requires 18 ounces of silver to be equal to one ounce of gold ; and, therefore, the chief commercial countries have either wholly or partially suspended the coinage of silver." He here, with studied vagueness, asserts that silver at the old ratio of 18 to 1 had depreciated as compared witb'gold, and for that reason was demonetized; thus illustrating again his fluent disregard of facts. The truth is, the American sliver dollar was always Bince 1833, worth more than the American gold dollar down to the very date when it was demonetized, and at tbat date It stood at a premium of - 34 ner cent. The depreciation of our silver, as compared witn our gold dollar, was caused by the acts of demonetization accomplished through a conspiracy of usurers. If Mr. Sherman does not know that lact he Is less informed on tbe subject than nine out of 10 of his hearers. He ought to know why it was demonetized, tcr he introduced a bill for tbat purpose in the United States Senate in 1868, and advocated its demonetization before the congress of bondholders In Paris. The sole reason was that the insatiable avarice of tbe bondholders of Europe and America sought to appreciate the value of their bonds and depreciate tbe value of all property and labor in which their bonds were payable by striking out of existence one half of the world's metallic money. NATIONAL BANKS. . The proposition to substitute legal tender treasury notes for National bank notes, which is one of the great issues between tbe two parties in tbis campaign, is met by Mr. Sherman with an oft-repeated, but utterly fallacious, assertion that there wonid be no saving to tbe peeple by such substitution- He admits tbat with the (323,000,000 of treasury notes substituted for bans notes, about an equal amount of 4 per cent, bonds could be bought up and destroyed, thus saving Interest to the amount of (13.120.0JO per annum; but he asserts that one fourth or that sum must be added to the coin reserve to redeem the new treasury notes, and the bonded debt increased correspond lngly In purchase of such ooln. I have already shown that this substitution does not involve the addition of a dollar to the coin reserve, tbe United States being now the red emptor in coin of bank, notes as well as greenbacks. He farther asserts that the banks pay taxes to the United States and the States equal to nearly (i7,0i'0,000 a year, 8 id that all tbis will be lost If legal tenders be substituted for ban k notes. The answer is that the National banks pay no tax whatever to the general or the State Government, except snon as the private btnks also pay save only the 1 per cent, tax on average outstanding circulation. Tbis tax is somewhat less than (1,280,000 a year, and It Is the only tax which would be lost by tbe substitution. The other taxes, paid alike by National and State and private banks, are on deposits, capital, cbecfes, etc., which will continue to - be paid by the present National ban aa or; by their successors, if they should reorganise under State laws after their circulation shall have been withdrawn. The saving, therefore, to the people by that substitution would be wit bin a fraction of (I0,0u0,ouo per annum. It wonid be a saving to the people of Ohio of about (750,000 a year, and to Uie people of Gallia county of about (7,000 a year. It theaubatltu'lon be male gradual, a propos d by the Democratic platform, It will in no manner disturb the business of the banks or tbeir customers; will wrong no one, for the charters of the banks contain a reservation of authority

to alter or amend them at the pleasure of the Government: will give the people a better currency and lighten their tax burdens.

ine Administration orators, to aeiena tneir pet corporations from a loss of this subsidy and this control over tbe volume of tbe currency, and consequently over prices, indulge In a good deal of bugaboo talk about the old State banks, charging ns with a purpose to restore their issues of paper money. That is all a mere scare. Not one Democrat in ten in either braucu of Congress would vote to restore the State bank system. Tbe question Is not one cf choice between State bank issues and National bank issues, bat between a costless legal-tender currency Issued by the Government and a subsidized currency issued by corporations. Mr. Sobnr ridicules my assertion tbat the power to issue money and control its volume is a power to raise and lower values, to giye prosperty to Industries or inflict distress upon them; that it is a sovereign power, and, therefore, should not be given to private corporations, especially those which represent the Interest of the money class, which generally seeks to have great public and private debts contracted in cheap money and paid in dear mouey. He lifts np his hands In horror at the extreme federalism which he asserts is involved in giving to tbe Government this power to control money and values. "My Democratic friends," says he, "1 ask yon In all candor, have you considered what kind of a leader yon bave put at the head of your party, and what kind of doctrine you are called upon to accept and Indorse by voting for him? Do yon remember upon what grounds the Democrats fought tbe old Whigs? Was It not mainly that the old Whigs were thought to favor an undue accumulation of power in tbe hands of tbe Government, while the Democracy contended that the powers of the Government should be carefully limited and circumscribed? And now 1 say to you, never did the extremes! Whig in his boldest dreams conceive so monstrous an accumulation of Governmental power as General Ewing claims for the Government in tbis single sentence " I respectfully suggest to Mr. Schurz a little reading In the political history ot this country to rectify his notions of the issues between the Democracy and the Federalists first, and the Whigs afterward, on this question of bank money or Government m ney. Let him start with Jefferson, and read his letters to Eppes. in one of which he says: "Carthago delenda est. Bank paper must be suppressed, and the circulating medium restored to the Nation, to whom it belongs." Then let him look at Madison's message of Decemb-r, 1815, where he says: "It may be necessary to ascertain the terms upon which tbe notes of tbe Government shall be issued upon motives of general policy as a common medium of circulation." Then let him look at John Kan lolph's expression of opinion, tbat "treasury notes lu time of peace are a better substitute for gold and silver than any paper I have heard yet proposed." Then let him look at Jackson's farewell address, In which he says: "Corporations which create paper money can not be relied upon to keep the circulating medium uniform In amount. In times of prosperity, when confidence is high, they are tempted by the prospect of gain, or by the Influence of those who hope to profit by it, to extend their issue of paper beyond tbe bounds of discretion and the reasonable demands of business; and when these issues have been bushed on from day to day until public confidence Is at last shaken, then a reaction lakes place, and they immediately withdraw tbe credits tbey have given, and suddenly curtail their Issues, and produce an unexpected and ruinous contraction of the circulating medium, which is felt by tbe whole community. The banks bv this means save themselves, and the mischievous consequences of their imprudence or cupidity are visited uron tbe public." ' Let him look, too, at Jackson's message in 1820, where he says: "1 submit to the wisdom of the Legislature whether a National system, founded on the credit of the Government and its revenues, might not be devised which would avoid all constitutional difficulties and at the same time secure all the advantages tbat were expected to result from the present bank." Let him then consult George M. Dallas, who said: "The power of the Government to supply and maintain a paper medium of exchange will not be questioned." Let him then look, too, at Calhoun's speech in the House of Representatives, February 26, 1818, In which he sas: "The state or our circulating medium is opposed to the principles of the Federal constitution. The power was given to Congress by that Instrument In express terms to regulate the currency of tbe United States. In point of fact, that power, though given to Congress, is not in their hands, it is exercised by bank institutions." I furnish these extracts, not for the information of any Democrat tolerably well read In political history of his country, but for that of Mr. schurz. woo may oe saved oy reading them from making himself ridiculous again by loose rhetoric on old and familiar issues of American pontics. Mr, Schurz attempts the reductlo ad absnrdum with my suggestion that tbe National banks could find profit in seasons of Industrial distress. Let him consult Patterson's discussion Ol the operations of tbe Bank of England, In whlcb be shows that every period of panio and disaster to business, brought on by the operations of tbe bank Itself, has been a period oi extraorainary prone 10 it ana iu blockhnldera. Our National banks, with a capital of (490,000,000, divided (47,000.000 In 1878 and (41,000,000 In 1877, the two most disastrous years to the buelness or tbeir customers since itu-s. i ne statistics of 119 National banks In Boston, New Yoik, Philadelphia and Baltimore show an actual fall In the prices of bank stock between 1874 and 1878 of but 6 per cent.; but, meantime, everything which money buys fell over 40 per cent., which shows that tbe wealth of tne snarenoiaers oi isauonai oanas nas increased in relation to other property about 8 per cent, in tbe lour years of disastrous preparation for resumption. Mr. Sberman praises the National banks for tbeir loans to tbe people of (832,000,000. W here did they get the money? Their whole capital is only (170,000,000, and that is Invested almost entirely in united mates uonus, on wnicn mey draw from 4 to 6 ner cent, interest. How did they get (832,0u0,000 of paper to loan? They get (128,000,000 by having the United States print their promissory notes. Who else have the high privilege oi having their debts made legal tender for public dues and of drawing Interest on tbe loan or them ? You, my f rlend, make your note for a hundred dollars and give it to your neighbor for a debt, but you pay 6 to 10 per cent, interest on It. Tbe National bank makes its promissory note, which Is equally aa evidence of debt, and gets interest on It. Tbat accounts for (328,000,000 of the (832,000,000 which these beneficent institutions iuraisu to tne neonle at from 8 to 12 ner cent. ter annum, dis counted quarterly. The balance of the (812,wu,mv is made up oi oiner people s money aeDoslted for safe keening and loaned at an eauallv exorbitant rate of Interest. Is it any wonder that the National banks can piylO per cent, dividends ana lay up 4 or a per Cent, surplus each year, eyen when all Industrial enterprises are perishing and their capital being consumed? But I do not see in tbis a reason, as Mr. Sherman, does, why the (10,000,00 1 subsidy paid eacb year oy tne people to tne National banks should not be stooped. Take a slate and pencil and figure on this problem. A National bank witn nuu.uuu in f reen backs Invested In 8 ner ceat. bonds In 868 received (90.000 of circulation. If you assume tbat the circulation and tbe Interest on the bonds to be loaned at 8 per cent., discounted quarterly, tbe bank could now close np its bond and circulation account, and pay off its circulation and return Its capital to Its shareholders, aud In addition divide -vmong them (328.000. 1 assume that Interest on deposits will cover expenses, taxes and other shortages. This (328,000 is worth a much now aa double tbe amount was worth in 1868. When we reflect that about (350,000,OJ0 were set to accumulating, under this National bank system 13 years ago, we can acooant in part for the impoverishment or the people and tbe enormous aggregation of wealth in tbe bands of the few wnich have been going on since the war. Banks graciously loan vast sums to the people, says Mr. Sherman. Just so. "Banks support the Stale," said a French satirist, "Just as a rope supports a man who Is hanged 1" .... - . ..... Mr Schurz, with characteristic courage and characteristic contempt for opposing opinions, says that tbe agitation for the substitution of legal lenders ror Dana notes "Win at last convince tbat class of well meaning men who, although In favor of honest money, bave been affected by hat sentimental Idolatry ol the greenback which has confused so many minds, mat, alter ail, nuuer our constitution, aa in every well regulated polity. It Is not a legi'Iraate fnnction of the Government to be a bank of Issue." Tbat means, of course, exactly what the re sumption law meant ana intended mat tne greenback money shall all be destroyed and tbe whole cower of Issuing paper money and regulating its volume commuted to tbe Na-

tionol banks. He has the boldness to say right out what the money power intends to accom

plish u its servant, tne Kepuoucan party, Is retained in power. He speaks the almost unanimous sentiment of the Eastern ReDublU can press and leaders. Toe conflict between bank money and Gevernment money is Irre pressible, ana win never end until one shall totally suppress tbe other. Let tbe people of Ohio heed misstatement, and declare in this election whether they will double their ten million annual subsidy for the National banks by surrendering to them me whole power of issuing paper money, or abolish it altogether by exercising in respect of paper money the same sovereign lunctlons they exercise In respect of coin, and regulate lu volume, as proposed by tbe Ohio Democratic platform, in such manner as to give tbe greatest possible regularity of volume and stability of value. ,. REPUBLICAN EXTRAVAGANCE. Mr. Sherman bas the amazing recklessness to assert t hat "the Republican administration has been marked by a uniform decrease of expenditures, as shown by the official table of net ordinary expenditures;" and "tbe Democrats have been rapidly increasing appropriations since they have had control ol Congress " He attempts to sustain these assertions by figures made up, not from publisned official reports, but from data of which the public has no information. I appeal from John Sherman on the stump to John Sberman in the treasury. I hold in my hand his own last report to Congress, in a volume entitled "Finance Re port, 1878." On page 17 is given the net ordinary expenditures of tbe Government (exclusive of premiums, interest aud public debt), in which it is stated that those expenditures since 1870 were eacb year as follows. I give the figures exactly as published by him : 1871 - . . (157,583,000 1872.. . 153,201,000 1873... I874. 1875 . 180,488,000 191,118,0-X) 171,529,1100 , 16I.8S7.000 i 144,209,OuO 1876.. 18;7 1878 . I34,4S3,UU0 The appropriations from 1871 to 1876. inclu sive, were made by the Republican Congresses, and those for 18JC and 1878 by a Democratic House. The Republicans ran ap these expenditures from (153 Oi 0,000 in 1872 to an average of nearly (178,000,000 for each ot the four years thereafter; while tbe Democrats reduced the expenditures for the two last years of the report to but little over (:39,oo0,00i) per year, making an annual saving of (38,000,000. It is true that for 1879 the Democrats increased those appropriations to (lo7.0UO,Oi0. and for 180 u (16O.0U0.W0; a chief part of which Increase was claimed by the administration to be necessary because the Democratic House bad cut down too much of the appropriations for the preceding years. But lake the wb.le average of appropriations and expenditures for the four years of Democratic rule, from 1877 to 1880 Inclusive, and the four years of Republican rule, from 1873 to 1876 inclusive, and tbe result is as follows: Tbat the Republicans expended an average of (177,748,000 for the net ordinary expenditures of the Government,whlle the Dem crats appropriated an average of (149,201,000, being a saving to the people by reason of Democratic economy of 28.a7,0j0 per year, or (114,108,000 in me four years. Mr. Sberman, in replylug to my Lancaster speech, asserts that so far from this economy being forced upon the Administration by tbe Democratic Congress, we actually appropriated more than the departments asRed for. Here the finance minister of our Government is equally at fault. For the year 1877 tbe admin istration asked a lltlie over (200,125,000 for its ordinary expenditures; we gave it (145,182,004. For the year 1878 tbe administration asked 181,182,000; we give it (140,384,000. For tbe year 1879 It asked 178,226,0u0; we gave it lo7. 213,000. For tbe year ls&o It asked 16i.lSl.0Oj; and we gave it (160,919,000. So that the Democratic Congress has in four years prevented the Administration from spending over (120,000,000 more than was necessary ror me ordl nary expenses of the Government. I say more tban was necessary, for Mr. snenua says that during the four years of Democratic control over appropriations "the administration has felt no restraint from Insufficient appropriations in the if real branches of the Government." Mr. Sherman. In explaining the enormous appropriation of S19l,ooo,ouO for the ordinary expenses of the Government in 1874, says that "the appropriations for that year were pur posely largely increased as a means ol relief irom tne enect oi tne panic." eympatnetic Mr. Sherman ! How good it was In you and your nartv to come to the relief of the strug gling industries of the country ! But the fact is, tne appropriations lor mat year were mane at tne session oi (Xingress wnicn enuea iwarcn 4. 1873 six monms Deiore i ne panio occurred The excessive appropriation was due, therefore, to extravagance and not to sympathy for tne people. CLAMOR AGAINST TBI SOUTH, Messrs Sherman and Schurz are distressed with apprehensions of danger to tbe Government from the Confederate brigadiers. Tbey cry out against the caucus, as though it was an Invention of tbese Southern men to control tbe Democratic party and thus rule the ooun try. They have themselves sat in more caucuses tban they have hairs on tbeir beads. What danger Is there from Confederate brigadiers? Not one of tbem bas proposed any measure in Congress to impair any settlements of the war. Tbey bave over and over asain declared tbat they and their people accept those settlements as final and never to oe disturbed. What more Is demanded? Nothing. Tbe Republican party bas not asked for more. The outcry against me soutnern people lor send log to Congress men who fought iu tbe Confederate army Is senseless and shameful. They have no other men or large experience and capacity to send. Would you force them to send onlv nearoes and carnet-baggersT would yon undo the work of paciflcation which tbe president nas done? would you revoae tne trade consummated bv Mr. Foster, by which Packard, who got moie votes in Louisiana for governor man Hayes got lor presiaent, was counted out and Hayes counted in? Recollect, gentlemen of the Republican party, tbat tbe South has not me same large choice or noncombatants to f elect for high offices which tbe Republican party has. All her men and boys bad to go into the Confederate army to meet our overwhelming numoers, wnue tne moron did not send a half of her men. In this re spect the Republican party has the South st a big disadvantage, 'i ney cau select suon men as Messrs. Sherman and Foster, who quietly stayed at home, while tne unfortunate sou in bas no non-combatants to prefer over her soldiers for her nublic honors. Mr, Updegraff and Mr. Garflleld said in effect at me soldiers- reunion at euoenvnre me other day tbat when tbe South should consent that tbe Government shall be conducted on the accented fact that tbe Nort h was right and me South was wrong on the great issue of the war, then sectional strife should cease. Tbe Southern representatives have admitted it. They do not admit, and we have no right to expect mem to admit mat mey were iaise to tbeir convictions ot daty in asserting and maintaining the alleged right of secession. But 1 assert that there is not one man from the South In either House of Congress who does not accept me decision of tne ar as me nnai settlement of that question, or who does not agree that all the-ainendments of the constitution made to give permanent enect to tbat settlement snail oe r-spectea ana ooeyea ana executed by appropriate legislation. In view of this it is mean and nnnairlotlc la tbe Re publican leaders to keep up the senseless clamor aa-alnst the Booth and prevent the res toratlon of harmony and good will, wlthont which the sacrifices of the war were all in vain. FREE EJECTIONS. Neither Mr. Schurz nor Mr. Sherman bas a word to say Justifying the use of troops at the noils, for which thev and the administration fought so vigorously. Tbey know that It is a power that Is an alien and a foe to our republican system of Government, and that the determination or the administration to retain that power will meet tbe disapprobation of the peo ple. But Mr. Schn-z attemnta to ridicule tbe stern demand of me Democracy to have that odious power wiped from our statu e books. He says: - Does an y sa n e man th 1 n k th Is ad m 1 n istratlon capable of sending tbe Federal soldiers to the Dai lot oox to overawe tna rreeaom oi meeiect ore? The Dresldent withdrew the Fed. eral soldiers from tbe legislative halls of the Southern Sijitea." Yes, sir, that was when the president was playing the roll ot conservative; that was when he had Just been put into power by a truck and dicker arrangement, got np by Mr. Foster; mat was wben both of them were cry-, ing out against Federal interference witn State Legislatures and State elections, and were anxlona for "tbe flag to float over States. not provinces." Bat a change has coma over me spirit or tneir an ams. Mr. r osier pieaus the "babv act." and the Dresldent has taken up ail low fellows In the Southern States whom be tramped down' in getting to power. ana given mem nigo stations uu koou aviaries. He is a stalwart now; has made up with all whom he offended by "withdrawing Fede ral soldiers from the legislative balls of tb

Southern States," and Is as lion-mettled as

Zach Chandler. But whether be would or . would not abuse the power, as Grant did. Is not the question. The question Is whether any president can constitutionally be given, or should ha ve, the power to send troops to keep the peace at the polls, or to, in any way, Intermeddle with State elections? Mr. Sherman does not attempt to justify tbe marshals and supervisors law as either c institutional or expedient. Its unconstitutionality Is demonstrable to any man of common Intelligence, whether lawyer or layman. When the constitution was framed the whole control of elections of members of Congress was reserved to the States: but Congress was given ' power to alter me state regulations as to me time, places and manner of holding sncb elections, because it was thonght probable that It mignt oe important to tne general Govern- . meat to have those elections all on one dav or to bave them held In single districts. Then It was suggested, at me very close or t e debate, tbat possibly some State" might refuse altogether to elect members of Congress; and fn such event Congress ought to have power to maae an necessary provisions lor electing members of Congress in sucb States. Solely to provide for this contingency, as Mr Madison says, the clause was finally amended so as to read as follows: "Section 4. The times, places and manner of holding elections for senators and representatives shall be prescribed in each State by tbe Legislature thereof, but the Congress may at any time by law make or alter such regulations, except as to the places of choosing senators " Now, here Is the constitution ot Ohio. It provides tbat "every white male citizen of the United .States of tbe age of 21 years, wbo shall have been a resident of the State one year next preceding tbe electlon.and of the county, township or ward in whlcb he resides such time as may be piovided by law, shall have the qualifications of an elector and be entitled to vote at all elections." Here is tbe election law of the State providing tor the election of members of Congress and other officers. It provldi s bow long a person must be a resident of thecounty, township and ward prior to the election to have tbe right to vote. It provides how persons may gain or lote a residence, and what facts shall determine a residence; it provides for dividing tbe State into election districts, for furnishing ballot-boxes, fixing places of election. selecting judges fiom residents ot the election prelucls, - ana proviaing me wnoie manner oi conducting the elections and of making returns and proclaiming results. All tbe officers so authorized to couduct elections are State officers. Tbey derive tbeir authorlety under and are sworn to obey the State constitution and law. No one disputes the authoriety of the State to conduct these elections, or denies that mis whole election machinery, thus conducted and managed by State officers, is valid and in full force and op ration. But the Republican party, by its Federal election law, bas provided tbat two Federal supervisors may be appointed at each one of these elec: Inn precincts, with power to inspect t:ie ballots of electors and determine what votes shall be received and wbat votes rejected; and if any Slate election officer refuses to submthls Judgment to that of the Federal supervisors tbe supervisors may seize such election officer and drag bim from tbe ballot-box to a Federal prison, to be indicted and tried for the felony of disobedience to tbese Federal Interlopers. If a man's vote be challenged, and tbe State judges. In obedience to a State law, determine, on tbe facts presented, that be Is entitled to vote, the Federal supervisor may seize tbe elector before his ballot Is put in and drag him off to a Federal prison, although the power to define qualifications of electors, and, consequently, to provide for the method in which a right to vote may be determined, is, by the coustltnli-n of the United States, expressly reserved to the States, absolutely and unconditionally. Now, 1 believe there is not a lawyer of fair standing in Ohio who will risk his reputation on an opinion that the Federal Government bas any power to thus prevent an elector from voting, or In any manner supervise, control or direct or meddle with the State election officeis while conducting a Congressional election under this Stale law. Such interference is organized anarchy. No officer of a State Government can lawfully be directed or controlled by a Federal officer in tbe perform ance of his duties under valid estate laws, for each Government Is supreme in its sphere as defined by the constitution ot tbe United States. Tbis Federal election law Is, therefore, utterly and obviousiy unconstitutional. Mr. Sberman makes a faint attempt to justify tbe Republican party in enact ing this law by claiming that ti.ere were 80,000 illegal votes cast in the City or New York in 1868; but he does.not pretend tualexperience has proved tbe law to bave been a wise one, for be knows tbat wherever its power has been Invoked tbe deputies employed and paid out ot tbe public treasury bave been largely poor Democrats, tribed to desert their party lor (5 aday, and Hill more largely me most despicable scoundrels that could be rakeJ. from me bells of tbe big cities. Tbe law bas demonstrated Itself everywhere to be tbe basest and corruptee t instrument or partisanship ever seized upon to stay the downtall or a party In power. Dodging the question of me eoustltutionali .. ami uwnullUi,AV ..f Ka Ia or Vf r- Uhannan arraigns General Rice and myself fur having refused appropriations of money to hire these spies and tnarsnala to intermeddle with State electlous. He says tbe "withholding of public mouey for this purpose is a more dangerous opposition tban the attempted nullification of tbe tariff taws by South Carolina, put down by General Jackson, or even the attempted seces- -sion put down by civil war. By this doctrine nullification and secession are made easy by the refusal of a majority of either Hoateto ooey me law." He seems particularly sorry to find General Rice and toy self, after our "honorable record daring me war," in this terrible attitude or nullification and rebelllon. "If tbey were right during the war, mey are wrong now. I have no disposition to criticise them or arraign them, but I prefer to follow the old Republican flag that was hoisted In 18i4." Stop mere, Mr. Sherman 1 I want, -in the midst of your patriotic peroration, to call your attention to the fact tbat in following me Republican flag in 1858 you. yourself, ottered an amendment to the aimy appropriation bill to tbe eff ect tbat ' no part ot me military force of tbe United Suites herein provided for shall be employed lu aid of the enforcement of the enactments of tbe alleged Legislative Assembly of the Territory of Kansas;" and turtber, tbat your amendment was adopted: and further, because the Senate rei used to concur in vonr amendment.. Jou filllbustered ai.d forced the adsurnment of the first session of the Thirty-fourth Congress, leaving the army without a dollar of appropriations; and further, that when the president called Congress together again you voted to adhere to your amendment, and undertook to force an adjournment of tbe second session without permitting me passage of tbe army appropria- ' lion bill, but were overruled by a few of your conservative Republican colleagues Joining the Democrats and saving the army from diabanament for want of an appropriation. Tbe difference between your position then and now is this: Then you were struggling against a bad use of Federal troops in a territory over which the Federal Government had supreme control: and now you are struggling for a bad use of Federal troops and marshals to control State elections, with which tbe Federal Government has nothing whatever to do. . You were willing to disband the whole army -then rather tban suffer tbe Federal Govern- . ment to exercise its undoubted powers; and now you denounce as rebels and nulliflersmen wbo served through tbe war for the Union, while you prospered In peace and comfort t bo.ne, for disbanding your hordes of partisans, paid from tbe common treasury of me people to wrest from them the control of their ballot box. I am not dlsnosed. mv fellow-citizens, to claim that in the ordinary exercise of its now- -era Congress is at ltnerty to withhold appropriations for purposes prescribed by law. We did not withhold any appropriations me failure of which Is st all likely to Interfere with any of the departments ef the Government In the exercise of tbeir ordinary and acknowledged powers. We merely forbade the use of any money appropriated for the army to transporter maintain troops at me polls; and we withheld no appropriations, except for the fees of marshals and their deputies. Wa . knew that ail the marshals would be patriotic enough to bold on to their offices and draw their regular salaries, and perform all their ordinary and useful duties, trusting to Congress to pay tbeir fees for legitimate service. ; wa niAnilv imaIvmI that the nubile treasura should not be wasted, nor tbe control of our, . Hr,tlMt.lrtni InterferM! with bv hlrinff bum--. mers and shoulder-hitters, or bribing needy, men, out of the common treasure ot the peoV pie. And we now appeal from tbe advocates, of Federal Interference to tbe lovers of borne, rule to sustain our action. We will let the ha.llat.hox itself declare whether it la safer In - the hands and under the control of me officer -. t li i. 1 ui m , nMOltintj nf r m Inn n I turn hired by the Administration and backed by -bayonets. This is not revolution, nor nullifl-. -; cation, nor secession, but only an orderly, hnnost anil na.trfnt.lA anneal from feaar to the people. : -