People's Pilot, Volume 5, Number 7, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 August 1895 — Page 6

HORR AND HARVEY.

EIGHTH DAY OF THE GREAT FINANCIAL DEBATE. The Money Purchasing; Power of the Products of Labor Since the Civil War Opened —Water Power Used as an Illustration. (Copyrighted 1895 by Azel F. Hatch.) Chicago. July 27. —The Horr-Harvey debate was continued to-day before the usual demonstrative audience. The most essential points under discussion are covered by the following stenographic report: Good Times After ’73. Mr. Horr —Now, what occurred after the passage of the law of 1873? Those occurrences have a direct bearing on the question we are discussing. We resumed specie payments in 1879, and, as Mr. Harvey himself stated, you cannot get at the real changes occasioned by the law until after we resumed specie payment. By that time the high prices had fallen off—that is, the nominal prices—because the measure in which they had been valued had been advancing all the while, not on account of any change in the value of gold, but on account of the paper money which we •were using as the measure constantly appreciating in value until it finally reached par with gold. At that time prices as compared with 1860 were as 106.9 to 100 and wages were as 141.5 to 100, showing that the wage earners were receiving much better pay—nearly 50 per cent —than they received in 1860. But the purchasing power of wages was 132.3 instead of 100, while the av ‘rage amount had increased from 100 in 1860 to 141.5. Now, labor was better paid and men enjoyed the nec- ' essaries and comforts of life to an enormously greater degree, notwithstanding silver had at that time declined from 100 to 84.7. Thus it will appear that in 1890 all wages had risen from 100 to 158.9, and the purchasing power of wages had increased more than 72 per cent. In 1870 the average of all prices was 142.3; wages 162.2, and the purchasing power in greenbacks was 114.1. In 1890 prices were 92.3, wages 158.9, and their purchasing power in gold was 172.1, showing that the wage earner for his day’s work got one and nearly three-fourths as much of the things he needed in 1890 as he could have got in 1870. Now what I ask you as I close my first talk is this: Why did you select your data from England and undertake to base your argument upon English prices when you could have found the prices all tabulated and shown accurately by a committee of your own country, about articles which we are using here in the United States?

Hard Tinies After '73. Mr. Harvey—The London price of iwheat affects the price of our wheat on ithe Chicago market. In the official book we have been here from Washington, entitled “Coinage Laws, Appendix and Statistics,” there are three tables. One is the Sauerbeck table, one the Sautbeer table, and the other the Aldrich table. The Aldrich table is the one he refers to as containing 249 articles. It was made by a senate committee of which Senator Aldrich was chairman. He called to his aid principally gold assistants. Unlike Sauerbeck, they were not free from a desire to make as good a showing as they possibly could for prices in the United States. When it is known that Edward Atkinson was one of the men who assisted in making it (the report so states) one can judge of the bias that enters into it.

This man Atkinson has recently said in an article published over his signature in a Chicago newspaper that the proper way to deal with a silver man is to hit him over the head with a club. This Aldrich report was made in 1891, when the men making it supposed prices had reached the lowest point they would possibly go to. And yet it shows a decline in prices of 30 per cent ■below 1872 and 8 per cent below the prices of 1860. Mr. Horr has repeatedly called you attention in this debate to a new system of measuring property. It Is a system that he calls the human toil unit. It is a deceptive argument. It is ridiculous to an intelligent man to (have this financial argument confused with a confusing proposition of the human toil unit. Human toil sells its services for a medium of exchange which it can exchange for the substance and necessities of life. And I can only reply to Mr. Horr’s argument on that question in the language he used to Mr. Brown himself—that it is so absurd as not to be considered soberly.

Wants Fair Exchange Value in Money. The gold standard men are constantly pointing to the gold dollar as being worth 100 cents as measured in itself—of course it is. It is a self-evident proposition, as measured in itself it is worth 100 cents. What we want to consider is the exchangeable value of money with property and the exchangeable value of property with money. And from these combined tables that are now a part of this debate you learn that lesson and you learn it in a way that no confused argument that can be put into the controversy can affect you. Free Coinage Socialism* Mr. Horr —I was writing in reply to a man who thought we ought not to have either gold or silver, a man who believed as my friend Harvey used to teach only a littU while ago, that every kind of money should be a piece of paper stamped by the government, and anybody that will read the article will see that he was only a greenbacker of the old sort, but bis theories were ab-

' solutely so ridiculous that they wsre ! contemptible. (Harvey here entered a ! denial and referred to stenographer’s ) notes.) What I said in reference to his theories being ridiculous was not in reference to his measure of value at all. It was his whole attempt to substitute a paper dollar based upon nothing with which to do the business of the country. That is where Harvey will land yet. The disease he has never dies out. He I hasn’t reached the last stages of it. i That is the trouble. What he wants and what these people are after is to destroy all values and to destroy all property and to put this nation on a socialistic and anarchistic basis. (Cries of “No! No!” Now as to banks. Why is it that Mr. Harvey feels called upon to ?nter into a tirade against banks, and to indulge in such a torrent of abuse against bankers? Men may occasionally invest their money in bonds and mortgages and not become scoundrels by so doing. A man may even be an honest believer' in monometallism and not be either a thief or a robber. Indeed, a man may even believe that silver has had its day and should never again be used as standard money; he may believe that honestly, though Mr. Harvey may differ from him. Though I may not agree with him, he may be just as clear-headed, just as good a friend of humanity as either of us, “with charity for all, with malice toward none.” We should strive to convince those who differ with us of the error of their ways, but never lose sight of the fact that- we may be in the wrong and they may be in the right. Banks are a natural outgrowth of civilization. They have been continually improved to meet the growing business of the world. No nation can economically do its business without the aid of banks. When well managed they bless the people in any and every community where they are located. They add business and power to every dollar of the standard money in existence. They make a dollar in gold do more than twenty dollars used to do. Failures Followed Demonetization. Mr. Harvey—Notice the failures prior to 1862, when bank credit was supplying the people with money. Look at its terrible ravages in the last ten years; 115,000 business concerns .have gone into bankruptcy. How is it now? At least that many more are hanging on by their eyebrows. This is the reward of human energy and thrift. I do not mean to say that all these failures are to be attributed to this cause, but I do mean to say that the credit system of money, with its tax of $200,000,000 annually, will account for every dollar involved in these failures. If we had more real money instead of bank credit money there would be comparatively few debts and few failures. The first lesson to learn is the necessity for money. Civilization is so constructed as to make it a necessity. Our social fabric, by which our vocations are classified, makes of it a medium of exchange and necessity. To relieve the demand make money no more desirable than any other property; to take that one great strain from the human mind and turn it in a higher and nobler direction is the true study of economy and statesmanship. It is not a craze for money that civilization needs, but a craze for building up nice homes, for building up character, for studying the universe in which we find ourselves, and in advancing the destiny of the human race. This we will do if we will but break the influence of this money power. The monopoly of it has encouraged all forms of monopoly, and when we have destroyed this influence we shall be more competent to judge other questions that are sustained by the cultivation of a selfish principle.

The MaBRVN Are KeNtlens. The masses become restless. Why? Because they have become poor; because they have been deprived of the necessaries of life. They become restless, then comes crime, as I am giving you from the statistics in this debate. Then comes poverty and suicide and insanity. The country goes morally and politically crazy. Then comes the necessity for martial law; then comes the necessity for gatling guns and repeating rifles, for an increase of the police force, and for a standing army. In the last three weeks, and for the first time in the history of the United States, a general order has gone from the president of the United States to the commander of the army, laying down rules for governing the United States army in the control of mobs and riots. We are trending to monarchy, and it is wrong for Mr. Horr or any other man to shut his eyes to this defect in our civilization that I am now pointing out. If you would save liberty in this land, if you would preserve this, the United States, from the fate of Europe, it is your duty to do it, and it should become your pleasure to do it, and to do it you will act like intelligent men and you will act like free men. Per Capita Circulation. Mr. Horr—l desire to say that before we complete the debate I will give my friend Harvey due notice that his table on debts will receive all the attention that he will like to have given to it, and I will then reconcile my statement entirely that I made here the other day with the facts in the case. I will show that it has no reference at all to the debts that he gives, and that they cannot be included in the $40,000,000,000 that he made the people of the United Sates owe. But just now, during this talk of mine, I want to call the attention of the country to the fact that Mr. Harvey, true to the doctrines generally taught by his school, is mystified because he takes it for granted that the business of a country entirely depends upon the amount per capita of the circulating medium. He insists that if you shrink that you ruin the business of the country. We have in this country $26.02 per capita. We have ’ -zks. too. scattered

THE PEOPLE S PILOT, RENSSELAER. IND., THURSDAY, AUG. 8. 1895.

h.ll over the United States, and money j is a plethora in this country to-day. | There are hundreds of millions of dollars lying idle simply because there is nobody to use it. Did you know that? Why, my friend Harvey and all of you men who think that way, as usual, get the cart before the horse. It is not an abundance of money that makes business active: it is business that makes money active, in this world of ours. And until you can comprehend that point, Brother Harvey, you will never understand this financial question at all. Banker* Not Scam pg Mr. Harvey carries the idea that the banks are constantly fleecing the people and that they have their harvest when the people are in distress. Why, there never was a greater fallacy taught to the American people. Bank :s never make money when money is scarce, never make money in a panic, never make a great deal of money when interest is high Bankers make their money when business is active, when interest is low, when their deposits are all the while increasing, when the people have confidence and there is something to loan. He upbraided the banks because they loaned part of their deposits and made interest on them. Why, a bank —the first great effect it produces in a community is to set the money to being used a second time. The great bulk of the money of this country is used that could not be used at all under the old system or without banks. Men would have to have it in their drawers, in their pockets, in their tills, have to keep it for emergencies. Now they deposit it in the banks. He seems to think the bank does nothing but just gobble interest. The banks pay interest to depositors in most instances, in all savings bank instances, and they make the money of depositors earn an enormous sum, millions upon millions each year, that they would never get a cent for but for the banks investing it and paying them interest on these deposits. They can’t pay interest on deposits if they don't get some interest themselves. * Consequence* of Mr. Harvey—At the conclusion of this debate Mr. Horr and I have 2,500 words each at our disposal, to write at our leisure, within seven days after the debate, to sum u* the debate, and anything in Mr. Horr’s argument that 1 do not reply to to-day I will attend to in that summary, because there is only a short time left to us, and I want to answer some matters that have been introduced into this debate at the earlier stages. I want to speak a few moments on the proposition that wages have increased. Laborers are of two classes. One class is the kind that produce something with their labor, and depend on selling what they produce to receive pay for their labor. Under this class come allAour farmers. If one of them produces with his labor 100 bushels of wheat and gets SSO for it, then SSO is the price of his labor. But if he sells the’loo bushels of wheat for SIOO, then he has received double the pay he did formerly. We have seen how the farmer loses; also those who must sell what they produce to get pay for their labor. This has discouraged those vocations and men and women have drifted to the cities. The cities have proportionately outgrown the country in population. With the unemployed comes underconsumption. The trend of population should be to the country. To secure this there must be an inducement; farming must be made profitable. You must advance prices so that the farmer can pay his taxes more easily, so he can sell his produce for more money. The rural population will thus increase. The farmer can live on what he raises. This makes him independent, and an independent citizen is a good citizen and is no man’s slave. He is a patriot, and such men make a strong government.

Make Wage Ear: erg Happy. Our national policy should cultivate the dignity of the country home. Prosperity and love of home among the producers of the soil build up individual and national character. This policy will draw away from the ranks of the wageearners, give them happy homes, and leave the supply of wage-earners less than the demand. And this will raise the price of wage-earners’ wages. The man who now has work or a situation and selfishly reasons that he benefits himself by maintaining a dear dollar is neither bioad nor humane. He is assisting in wrecking his country, and it may be too late to remedy the error when he, too, is without employment. Mr. Horr—l have already called the attention of the country to the fact that the little boy Coin is absolutely without knowledge of mathematics or correct information concerning wealth, property or money. In his book the boy says, and Mr. Harvey in his debate repeats the assertion, that foreigners own real estate, personal property, bonds, stocks and mortgages in the United States to the amount of ten thousand million dollars. I now state that there is no shadow of authority for such a statement, and when Mr. Harvey reads my statement as to the short time debts he don’t get out of his trouble, because the debts I referred to were those that accumulate every day, and every man who does an hour’s work, when the hour is completed, has a credit for the amount of that work, and that work every week amounts to a fabulous sum. Mr. Harvey—l was discussing at the last session the banking system and the short supply of money to supply the .normal demand for business. I 'showed you the normal supply required, and to show you the difference between having the money in existence and having the banks supply it with their credit system I here hand the stenographer a table of failures as it appears in the January number, 1895, of Dun’s Review, to be copied and inserted at this point of the debate:

Failures for Thirty-Eight Years.

Amount of Year. Failures. Liabilities. .1857 4,932 $291,750,000 1858 4,225 95,749,000 1859 3,913 64,394,000 1860 3,676 79.807,000 18616,993 207,210,000 1862 1,652 23.049,000 1863 495 7,899,900 1864 •... 520 8,579,000 1865 530 17,625,000 1866 1.505 53.783,000 1867 2,780 96,666,000 1868 2,608 63,694,000 1869 2.799 - 75,054,054 1870 3,546 88,242,000 1871 2,915 85.252,000 1872 4,069 121.056,000 1873 ..5.183 228,499.900 !1874 5,830 155,239,000 ,1875 7,740 201,000,000 1876 9,692 191.117,000 1877 8,872 190,669,936 j 1878 10.478 234,383,132 1879 6.658 98,149,053 1880 4,735 65,752,000 1881 5,582 81,155.932 1882 6,738 101,547.564 1883 ~...9.184 172,874,172 1884 10.968 226.343,427. 1885 10,637 124,220,321 1886 9.434 114.644,119 1887 9.634 167.560,944 1888 10.679 123.829,973 1889 10,882 148,784,337 1890 10,907 189,856,964 1891 12,273 189,868,638 1892 10.344 114,044,167 1893 15.242 346,779,889 1894 13,885 172,992,856

It shows that during the years of the war, when there was plenty of money, and the total volume was confined to what was known as the Union side of the controversy, making about S4O per capita, the number of business failures was reduced to a minimum. See, as you look at it, see how the contraction of the currency, beginning in 1866, increased the failures. Follow it now along down the years to 1894, and note its ravages as demonetization and bank credit, with its terrible tax on the people, were substituted for real money.

Defending Banking System. Mr. Hoc’’ —I must return to the question of banks. To a man accustomed to doing business at the present time the present methods of conducting commercial transactions are readily understood. That the quantity of gold in the world has not increased as fast as the business of the world has increased I admit. But it does not take as much standard money to do the same amount of business to-day as it formerly did. Human ingenuity has devised methods so that one hundred dollars in gold will do the same work that more than two thousand dollars used to do. Hence Mr. Harvey’s contention that the quantity of the standard money alone determines its value is incorrect. This increased power of gold which enables one dollar to do the work that twenty or more dollars used to do diminishes the actual demand for the metal itself, and hence prevents the burden he talks so much about being anything like in proportion to the amount of the business done in the world. Ninety-five per cent of the entire business of this country is done without the exchange of a dollar of currency. But it is all done on a gold basis, with a gold measure for value. While the gold is the measure of value the business is done by using all kinds of credit as a substitute for the money itself. It would be correct to say that, all other things being equal, the quantity of water in a running stream would measure its value as a power to be used to aid man in the production of commodities. Yet the same quantity of water turning an old fashioned undershot wheel will not compare in its benefits with the power obtained from the same quantity of water when mills are located along the bank of the stream at successive falls, and the same water Is used over and over again with turbine wheels, which take the place of the undershot, and thus increase the power in every mill, obtained from using the same water. Thus it is that the work which can be done with the same amount of gold is enormously increased by our new methods of bookkeeping and banking. ♦ ♦ * But j now come ( 0 the keynote of Brother Harvey’s entire system. He bases his new philosophy entirely upon the theory that the people of the world are mostly in debt. You won’t deny that (turning to Mr. Harvey.) It does not occur to him that the debtors and creditors, when you speak of sums of indebtedness, are always precisely the same. But the number of the debtors and creditors differ very greatly in all civilized and uncivilized countries. His whole method seems to be to prove that everybody is in debt, and that the legislation of the world should all be directed so as to relieve the debtor.

Just Like a Mill Stream. Mr. Harvey—Mr. Horr compares our money to a stream of water, and to the utilization of that water in the manner in which he illustrates it. I want to make another comparison to put alongside Mr. Horr’s illustration: Money is a stream. Suppose that along that stream manufactories had been erected, and all have adjusted themselves to the quantity of water, that life-giving fluid that Is flowing by them, and suddenly onehalf of that water Is taken out of the stream, what is the effect? (Applause.) That is the proper illustration to quote in this discussion in the demonetization of Oliver. (Applause.) Let me draw another illustration from the gentleman’s figure: Suppose we were by laws to give rights to men living along the banks of the stream of water to store it away, draw it out and put it in great reservoirs, and rent it to the manufactories and business houses along that stream that had adjusted themselves to the use of It, requiring them to pay a toll for the use of that water —then you would have our present banking system. (Applause.)

Mr. Horr —Glancing at them I find »hat this reports the failures of 1857 as compared with the failures of 1893. That is, they report the failures of both these years, and I make the comparison. 1857 was a year of fearful panic. I lived during those years. I suffered duri-’ those years. I know something of the trouble that spread over this nation then. We then had, according to my friend Harvey, a double standard. We had another bad failure in 1893, which he attributes to our being on the gold standard. I am not going to take the time in this debate to tell you what really led up to that panic in 1893, but one factor that entered into the panic of 1893 was the fear of the business men of this country and the world that our nation was going to be given over to a class of men that were shouting for free silver. That was one great trouble. In his immense effort in his last speech to make out that the country was going to ruin he recites the suicides and diseases that are incident to ttys human family at this time. But before I get through I must finish the failures of 1857. That table of his shows that they amounted to $291,750,000, or $lO per capita. That was under your double standard. In 1893 when we were under the gold standard, the failures were $346,779,000, that is $5.2' per capita. (Applause.) • They w’ere . >st about double in 1857 what they w're in 1893. But i iw to go back. Yesterday in a vivid description of what we are doing under this crushing money power he could not express himself until he compared the story df the crucifixion of our Savior, and laid that to the money power of that day. He forgot that the only man that betrayed our Savior was Judas Iscariot, the only silver man of the entire tribe (applause), and, what is remarkable, he insisted on a ratio of thirty to one. (Laughter and continued applause.) Now he takes up my illustration of the running water and wants me to tell him what would happen if they took away one-half of the water from the fount of a stream and so let only half of it run down. If they should do that unless there w’as plenty of water in the stream after they took the half it would make trouble. But if they could spare half and still have enough to do all the business of the country it wouldn’t make one particle of difference, not one particle. And before I get through I am going to convince Mr. Harvey, so that he will leave the room perfectly overwhelmed (laughter and applause) with the truth of my proposition. (Laughter and applause.)

Credit a Good Thing. Now my idea of life is entirely different from his. I think that credit Is a good thing, and we cannot have a creditor unless there is a debtor. Mr. Harvey, you are not the first person I have seen in the world who has conceived the idea that everything is wrong in the world on account of some one thing. I sometimes call such men cranks. (Laughter.) You will not be offended when I give the full definition of “crank.” I don’t use it for the purpose of being offensive. It is a man who has been thinking and brooding over some one thing until he twists everything in the universe so as to make it tally with his theory about that one thing, and then forgets all the other circumstances of life. It is on this account that Mr. Harvey talks constantly about the unlimited demand for money when free coinage is given to silver. Why, there is no such thing in the world as an unlimited demand for anything. He knows it. There is a limit to all demands for every kind of property, for everything in this world of ours. Why, I wonder, Brother Harvey, why instead of devoting yourself to business you haven’t before now established a school for the education of doctors. From your speech this morning on insanity, etc., you have a clear cut idea about physicians, and if you will apply your method of arguing you will open such a school to-morrow. The only way is to start out with the proposition that the whole human race is sick (laughter); that we are all subject to disease; that there isn’t a single person on the face of the earth who hasn’t some aches and some pain. Now If there is any unlimited demand for anything on the face of the earth, it is something that will relieve people from feeling badly. Doctors are the things. Consequently in order to carry out your theory it would become necessary to magnify the disease of the people. Make them think that every little ache is a disease that threatens life, and then you would get an unlimited demand for doctors. Now in order to carry out just that theory, my friend Harvey has magnified the debts of the people of this country. He does not recollect that the business of the world is more done upon credit than all other things combined. When you strike down the credit of the world you bring trouble. ♦ *»«**

Wage Earners Not Creditors.

Mr. Harvey—All that is necessary to reply to in what Mr. Horr has just said is this: That in computing the number of creditors and debtors in this country relatively, he has no right to count the wage-workers of this country as creditors because a week’s wages happens to be due them at the time he counts them. (Applause.) That a man who has ten or fifteen dollars due him, who »t the same time owes for grocery bills or other debts a larger sum than that ten or fifteen dollars, it is miserably ridiculous to have him counted in the creditor class. (Applause.) You cannot, Mr. Horr, defending the creditors of Old England and New England, get any sympathy or assistance from allies you are not entitled to, from men whom you seek to make your allies by a pretense that is base and false. Debts in this country have accumulated until men are now mortgaging property that they never thought of mortgaging before. When I say pawnbrok-

era I also have reference to the chattel mortgage fiend, so-called, who loans at from 2 to 5 per cent per month. Warehouses are now being constructed to store furniture—furniture that the owners ought to be sleeping on. I will drop this subject, because the least intimation makes the people know what I mean, by saying that I hold in my hand a book that gives the chattel mortgages in the state of Nebraska. Under a law there the owners of chattel mortgages were required to record them or they could not collect their money. And this book that I hold in my hand and pass over to Mr. Horr shows that there is a per capita indebtedness in the state of Nebraska on chattel mortgages alone of sl9 per capita, and that does not include the actual “three-ball” pawn shops; and I had a right when I said that the pawnbrokers of the United States had the people in debt to them $1,000,000,000. I had a right to say it, and it was true, as every other item in that list is true, which I have not now the time to answer without exhausting the words of this debate. Since this debate began I have followed its logical arrangement. Much more might have been said upon our side of this debate if it had not been diverted at almost every step after we had passed through the first chapter ending with the crime of 1873. We stayed together as far as that. Since then Mr. Horr has diverted this argument; had he not done so it probably might have been more educational. This debate is now coming to a close, except Monday, when we treat on independent action of the United States, and as I wish nothing Monday to interfere with what I shall say on that subject, I now wish to refer to an unpleasant matter. Presents Mr. Horr with a 17»» Dollar Since Mr. Horr came to Chicago, in newspaper interviews and in words used in this debate, he has alluded to me in very uncomplimentary language, and to my manuscript, to my manner and method of presenting these great truths to you. I am going to answer Mr. Horr, and, Mr. Horr, my answer is this: That I regarded this debate as a great question, involving the interests of the American people. My further answer is this: It concerns you. You are a man of vast experience. You are of all the public orators and debaters the foremost in America. You are the financial writer of the New York Tribune —aae the best posted man in the United States upon the gold standard side of this question. You were selected by the committee of bankers of this city for the reason that you are the ablest man in America to present it on their side. If there has been any weakness in your argument it has not been on your account, it has been on account of your cause. (Continued applause.) I have no word of reproach to pass back to you, I have only words of kindness to give you; and in addition to that I am going to do something that will cause you to remember this debate. I am going to give you a souvenir by which you may remember it. Omthe first day of this debate, when it was a question of supremacy between my cause and your cause, when It was a question of what was the monetary unit of measure in our coinage system fixed by our forefathers, I introduced many witnesses, among them Jefferson, the ccmmittee that was appointed to fix a monetary unit, the board of treasury, Secretary Gallatin of the treasury, Chief Justice Chase and others. But they are all now dead. I introduced one living witness. It was the dollar itself of 1799, with the word “unit” upon it. I am now going to give this coin to Mr. Horr. (Applause.) Take it, Mr. Horr. Washington may have carried it in his pocket; Jefferson may at one time have had it in his possession; it may have paid for the paper on which the declaration of war was written in 1812 against Great Britain; it may have been fondled by Jackson when writing his message to congress against the national bank. (Applause.) It is a fit souvenir for any American proud of his country and of its institutions to carry in his pocket all the days of his life. (Passing dollar to Mr. Horr. Applause, shouts, cries of “Hurrah!” and continued applause.) Mr. Horr —This little episode, according to all the rules of parliamentary debate and of social courtesy, requires a fitting reply of thanks to my friend for this very kind action. I must say, however, that I do not deserve one-half the eulogy he gives me. I came to this city myself expecting to discuss this question in a scientific and in what I call a straightforward way. I am not the most eloquent defender of the gold standard in the United States. I am perhaps an experienced public debater, that is, I have met many of the leading men of the United States who differ . with me on other great questions. I came here expecting that the debate would be carried on courtecusly, quietly, and that I- was to receive the treatment due to me as a gentleman. I have never yet complained of Mr. Harvey of one iota of discourtesy, or of anything of the kind. I don’t hold him responsible for the treatment I received through the first four days of this debate. I will leave it to him whether I wasn’t compelled in selfdefense to assert myself in order to stop the interruptions with which his sympathizers attempted to drive me out of this debate. And if I am guilty of any discourtesy, it isn’t to you, brother Harvey, nor could you control the men who forced me to say what I did. I was forced to say things that I never before in my life said to a public audience, but I had to do it in self-defense. Now, as the debate closes, I desire to say to you that I shall keep this dollar and put it to a good use. I intend to have a hole bored through it and then I will hang it around the neck of my little grandchild, born just as we commenced this discussion. (Applause.) This ended the day’s debate apd the usual* quota of questions followed. (Continued July 29.)