People's Pilot, Volume 6, Number 2, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 2 July 1896 — THE COXEY PLAN. [ARTICLE]

THE COXEY PLAN.

WOULD OIVB US MORK MONEY ’ andemployment; 1 Mr. T. D. Blackley Explode* toe Aacieat Sapentitioa tkat Money Must Have Intrinsic Vale*. Labor the Only Real Vale* la Money. A sensible resolution adopted by the Reform Press association at its Dallas meeting, recommended the Coxey noninterest bond and good roads bill to populist papers for discussion. The object sought to be accomplished by the Coxey bills is to is to furnish the people with the money necessary for the transaction of their business at absolutely no other cost than that of creating the wealth of which it is the representative. Under our present system of business the money which comes to the people reaches them freighted with such a burden of interest, collected in a thousand different ways, that it is entirely too costly a vehicle to use as an every day medium of exchange. This costliness of our present-day money does not inhere in its natural or real value but in the fact that it is surrounded by such huge artificial barriers called “usury,” “intrinsic value,” scarcity,” etc., that even in the best of times it is hard of access, while in times like the present its fortress is all but Impregnable. The greatest and in fact the one bulwark upon which it depends, however, is “intrinsic value.” And this bulwark Coxey’s plan sweeps out of existence at one blow. The Coxey plan proposes monej based on bonds, as the national bank currency is now, with this difference. The national bank currency is based on bonds the entire amount of which falls due upon a certain fixed date, is payable in gold, and bears gold interest paid twice a year in advance. The Coxey money would be based on bonds which would fall due <in twenty-five annual consecutive installments of four per cent each, payable in the currency for the issuing of which they were alone voted, and without interest. The national bank currency can only be issued to private corporations and can be used for “banking purposes,” alone, that is to say, note shaving, etc., and, once’ issued, is nothing but the debt of the corporation upon which it may collect legal interest.

The Coxey rgoney could be issued solely to some governmental subdivision, such as a town, city, county, etc., and could only be used for the purpose of such public improvements as the people of such governmental subdivision may elect, and when paid out for material and labor it would be full legal tender “money,” every dollar of which would have a dollar’s worth of newly created wealth back of it and would cost nobody a cent of interest. The national bank currency reads: “The First National bank of Blankville will pay the bearer on demand blank dollaj-s.” These due bills, when signed by the president of the corporation issuing them, are a legal tender only by sufferance and are absolutely dependent upon the scarcity of money for their circulation. The Coxey money would read: “This note is a legal tender for all debts, public and private,” and when signed by the national secretary of the treasury would be forwarded to the officers of the town or district in whose behalf the bonds were deposited, and would be paid out by them for the material and labor necessary to make the public improvements contemplated. But the one over-topping supreme difference between the two systems is in the fact that the national banking theory caters to the hoary headed, superstitious, “intrinsic value” theory, in the interest of a few money mongers, while Coxey’s plan boldly cuts loose from the idea that the money inventions of prehistoric barbarians are the best attainable, and proposes to crown the mighty advancement of the nineteenth century with a money issued by the people, in the Interest of the people.

The “lion in .the way” of the adoption of the Coxey idea is the blind reverence of the people for things that are ancient. This stupid veneration for old customs and usages makes gold and silver seem “natural money” and is responsible for the latent belief that the Supreme Being, when ordering sublunary affairs, expressly set aside the “precious metals” as a perpetual foundation for money. The first step, therefore, in a just consideration of the Coxey plan, is to rid the mind of the idea that money is a natural product like water, air, sunshine, etc., and firmly grasp the fact that it is an invention, and a product of man, just as a spade, hammer, or plow is. Get this fact once thoroughly grounded in the minds of the people and they will speedily realize that to confine themselves to gold and silver, or to paper made artificially as dear as' gold and silver, for their money supply, is as stupid, as would be a law or custom restricting them to rosewood or mahogany, or other timber artificially made as dear as rosewood or mahogany for their furniture material. There is. absolutely no more common sense reason why gold and silver, or their representatives should be selected for money material than there is why rosewood and mahogany, or their representatives should be selected for furniture material. The idea that nature has planted gold so deep in the bowels of tha cavth that R requires "a dollar’s worth at labor ta dig a Cellar's wwth es gsUT and that therefore. “gpH is aatawal aisi|,” u me aiUy wtimat mi ittniattia. ooagrem. rweuttb ta- oar prwaaai attaUge W, mta wtetam aniMMy t» Mt Bb>>M MM. BWm aSsuewuhssw

the labor necessary to dig a dollar’s worth of goM?* Do you say that, “the natural scarcity of gold and silver is a valuable const*oration which led to their being adopted as money metals that hurtful and unwarranted inflation of the 1 people’s money might not occur?” t Suppose the law decreed that eleven grains of gold should constitute a “dollar” would not the number of dollars be doubled in spite of the natural scarcity of gold? and if it decreed that 5 grains, or 2 grains, or 1 grain should constitute one dollar wouldn't the money volume be considerably Inflated in spite of mature’s (?) kindly efforts to restrict the supply by restricting the “natural” money material? But after all what is the use of debating this phase of the question when such eminent financiers (?) as Sherman, Cleveland and all other gold standard men agree that there isn’t gold enough for money and that the supply must be supplemented with paper currency? Why not ignore all the bosh about “natural money,” “God’s money," etc., and recognize the indisputable fact that money is nothing but the creature of law? If you will do this you will see at a glance that the only difference between Coxey and Cleveland on the paper money question is as to what class of people shall primarily benefit by its issue. Cleveland knows that there cannot be sufficient gold money coined to answer the requirements of' business. So does Coxey. Cleveland believes that the deficiency should be supplied by the issue of paper. So does Coxey. Cleveland believes that the right to issue the paper money should be delegated to national bank corporations. Coxey believes this right should be exercised, by the people. Under Cleveland’s plan only a corporation composed of not less than five persons and with not less than $50,000 Worth of interest bearing bonds would be permitted to issue its corporate notes as money. The, bonds upon which the corporation would draw interest in gold twice a year from'the government at four per cent, would be deposited with the secretary of the treasury to secure the money Issued by the corporation. The corporation would be allowed to issue $50,000, or par value of bonds, in currency, upon which it would be allowed to exact whatever rate of interest was legal in the state in which its bank was located. Thus it will be seen that under Cleveland’s plan the paper money which he admits is necessary to the people could not be had by them until they had paid two rates of interest, one to the government on Cue bonds of the bank, the other to the bank on its notes. Is it not easy to see whose interests the Cleveland-Sherman scheme of paper money primarily serves? And considering the mighty power wielded by concentrated money, can you not readily divine the source from whence the opposition to Coxey’s paper money plan comes? Finally, dear reader, can you give one logical reason why Coxey’s paper money should not supplant the national bank paper currency now in existence? T. D. HINCKLEY. Mt Vernon, 111.