People's Pilot, Volume 6, Number 16, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 8 October 1896 — THE CRIME OF ’73! [ARTICLE]

THE CRIME OF ’73!

THE GREAT CONSPIRACY LAID BARE BY GEO. C. GORMAN. The Dark Methods Used by Senator Sherman and Others to Secure the Demonetization of Silver—Statements of Senators and Members on the Subject. Colonel George C. Gorman, for many years resided in California, and was a member of the national Republican committee from that state from 1869 to 1880. He was secretary of the United States senate from 1868 to 1879, and was in the national political councils of the Grant and Conkling’element. He edited The National Republican at Washington for four years. For more than twenty years he has favored the restoration of the free coinage of silver, and left the Republican party in June last, when it adopted the gold standard, and is now an earnest supporter of Bryan and Sewall. He has written the following letter: The Hon. Charles P. Johnson, St. Louis, Mo. —Dear’ Sir: In compliance ■with your request I present the following narrative of the steps which led to the demonetization of silver in the United States in 1873, and the methods adopted to accomplish that result: The national debt at the close of the civil war was about $2,500,000,000, the principal being payable by law in any legal tender money, and the interest In coin. Certain great banking houses of Europe—following the example set by their predecessors in England immediately ater the fall of Napoleon, and setting an example which was followed by their class in Germany after the Franco-Prussian war —inaugurated a scheme to greatly enhance the value of this vast obligation by making it payable in gold and then increasing the value of gold. The Methods Adopted. This involved two legislative measures: First. Such changes in the laws of the United States as would provide for the payment of the principal of the bonds in coin only, and would forbid the payment of any portion of it prior to the resumption of specie payment, in legal tender treasury notes, in which it was expressly made payable by the Aw authorizing the issue of the bonds, and in exchange for which, when greatly depreciated, they had all been issued. Second. The demonetization of silver in the United States so that coin would mean gold only, and the value of that metal at the same time be greatly enhanced. The Hon. John Sherman, a senator from Ohio, became the chief promoter of this foreign scheme. On the 18th of May, 1867, being then on a visit to Paris and having just visited London, he addressed a letter to the United States commissioner to the international conference on coinage, weights and measures, then in session in the former city. Jn chat letter, which was published, he strongly urged the adoption of the gold standard, and said of his own country: “As coin is not now in general circulation we can easily fix by law the size, weight and measure of future issues.” The conference adopted the gold standard, and our commissioner reported that this result was largely due to the letter of Mr. Sherman. Senator Sherman next attempted to ‘‘easily fix by law” in this coutntry the new monetary system so essential to the success of the scheme above described. To that end, on the Bth of February, 1868, he introduced in the senate a bill (No. 217) to demonetize silver by discontinuing the .coinage of the silver dollar. He reported this bill favorably from the finance committee, but Senator E. D. Morgan, of New York, vigorously antagonized it in a minority report, in which, after showing the advantages to the United States of continuing the double standard, he said: “We have a distinctive American policy to work out —one sufficiently free ; from the traditions of Europe to be : suited to "our peculiar situation, and' the genius of our enterprising coun- , trymen.” From this stalwart blow by the great merchant senator from New York the bill never recovered. Mr. Sherman never again called it up. The movement for a gold standard was not renewed in any quarter until nearly two years afterwards, and more than a year after the expiration of Senator Morgan’s term of office. Strengthening the Bondholders. Meanwhile, in obedience to the concerted newspaper clamor inspired by the operators in bonds, congress passed the act of March, 1869, “To strengthen the public credit,” by which, without any consideration whatever, the principal of the bonds of the government, then payable in any lawful money, was made payable in coin only. The advantage this gave to the bondholders will be apparent when we consider that the major portion of the bonds were by law redeemable in any lawful money atthe pleasureof the United States. The act of 1869, to strengthen the purses of the bondholders, surendered this privI ilege and bound the. government to redeem in coin, then at an enormous premium. This was followed, July 14, 1870, by the refunding act, under which existing bonds were authorized to be converted into bonds payable, principal and interest, ‘in the coin of the United States of the present standard value.” That is to say, the value of-,July 14, 1870. Silver dollars at that time equally with gold a full legal tender. A second unsuccessful attempt at the demonetization of silver was Inaugurated on the 25th of April, 1870, by the introduction in the senate by Senator Sherman of “a bill (No. 859) revising the laws relating to the mint, assay offices and coinage of the United States.”' It I contained seventy-one sections, the fifi teenth of which gave a list of all silver coins to be thereafter issued, and the eighteenth of which prohibited the issuance of any not named therein. The silver dollar was omitted from the list. The bill passed the senate Jan. 10,1871, but was never acted upon by the house. The Third and Successful Attempt. The third and finally successful movement for the demonetization of silver was the introduction in the house of representatives on the 9th of March, 1871, of “A bill (No. 1,127) revising and

emending the laws relative to mints, assay office and coinage of the United States.” It was introduced by Mr. Keli ly, of Pennsylvania, chairman of the committee on coinage, and reported by him favorably from that committee on the 9th of January, 1872. He Informed the house that it had been prepared ! in the treasury department for the purpose of codifying and simplifying the mint laws, -the only important change being the creation of a mint bu- , reau in the treasury department. | It was recommitted Jan. 10 and again reported with amendments Feb. 9, 1872, this time by the Hon. Samuel : Hooper of Massachusetts. He slated ‘ that the bill reduced the weight of the ■ silver dollar from 412% grains to 384, J but he did not state that it proposed, ■ as it did, to demonetize silver by makj ing the silver dollar a legal tender j only in sums not to exceed $5. The bill then passed the house in the substitute form under a suspension | of the rules. Ignorant of Its Contents. Mr. Kelly of Pennsylvania, who im- : troduced the bill, declared on the floor : of the house in 1878 that, though he ! was chairman of the committee on I coinage, he was "ignorant of the fact that it would demonetize the .silver dollar.” (Congessional Record, vol. 7, part 2, page 1605.) Mr. Blaine, who was speaker of the house when the bill passed, declared on 'the floor of the senate in 1878 that he “did not know anything that was in .the bill at all,” and that “little was known or cared on the subject.” (Same, 1063.) Garfield declared that he knew nothing about it. (Congressional record, vol. 7, part 1, page 989.) Mr. Holman of Indiana, declared that the passage of the bill through the house was a “collossal swindle," and "never had the sanction of the house.” (Congressional record, vol. 4, part 6, appendix 193.) Mr. Cannon, of Illinois, said: “Neither members of congress nor the people understood the scope of the legislation.” (Same, page 197.) In the senate the bill was taken up for consideration on the 17th of January, 1873, and debated and passed on that (lay. All the debate that was ever had upon it in that body took place on that date. The l bill, as it passed the senate, contradicts in plain terms some positive assertions made by Mr. Sherman during the debate upon it as to the provisions it contained concerning the standard silver dollar. It demonetized silver, which he declared to the senate it did not. Mr Hooper had misled the house by omissions, evasions and indirections: Mr. Sherman deceived the senate by direct misrepresentations. This was "the crime of 1873.” The Proof of Deception. The ineffaceable proof of this serious accusation is contained in the report of the senate proceedings of Jan. 17, 1873, | in the Congressional Globe, from which ; I will quote some passages: Congres- ' sional Globe, parts 1 and 2, third ses- , sion. Forty-second congress, pages 668- I 674.. There was no reference in the debate to the fact that the bill would abolish the legal tender quality of silver. The house bill changed the weight of the silver dollar from 412% grains to 384 grains, and made it, like the smaller coins, a legal tender for $5 only. Mr. Sherman ha,d reported an amendment to strike this out, and insert instead a “trade” dollar, to weigh 420 grains, with the same limitation as to the legal tender quality. The bill prohibited the issuance from the mints of any coins not named therein. This was to make sure that the 412% grain dollar would not survive by any implication. The question may be asked how could Mr. Sherman thus deceive the senate. The reply is that the bill was being hurried through by him on his statement, at the outset, that its consideration “would not probably consume any more time than the time consumed in reading it.” That meant that its seventy-one sections contained nothing of sufficient importance to even require explanation by him, much less to call - for debate. It was represented by him to be merely a bill to enact into law some changes in thq mintage laws which the mint officers deemed necessary. He evidently satisfied senators that’it was not worth their serious attention. Those who have any acquaintance with senate proceedings understand very well that ' such mere routine legislation as this ; was represented to be attracts no attention in the senate chamber. The senator in charge is trusted to truthfully state its objects, and no one thinks of doubting his word. The Testimony of Senators. That no suspicion was being enterI tained at the time that silver was being demonetized by the bill is evi- ' denced from the declarations subsei quentely made in the senate in 1878. 1 On Feb. 15 of that year Senator Thur- ; man said: "I cannot say what took place in the house, but know, when the bill was pending in the, senate, we thought it i was simply a bill to reform the mint, i regulate coinage and fix up one thing and another, and there is not a single man in the senate, I think, unless a J member of the committee from which J the bill came, who had the slightest i idea that it was even a squint towards demonetization.” On the same day Senator Allison said: “But when the secret history of this bill comes to be told it will disclose the fact that the house of representatives I intended to coin both silver and gold, I and intended to place both metals upon the French relation instead of our own, I which was the true scientific position of this subject in 1873.” On the 30th of January, 1878, Senator ' Beck said: “It (the bill demonetizing silver) nev- ; er was understood by either house of ’ congress. I say this with full knowl- i edge of the facts. No newspaper reporter, and they are the most vigilant men I ever saw in obtaining information, discovered that it had been done.” From the record, which I have faithfully reproduced, it is impossible to reach any other conclusion than that the confidence of the house was abused by Mr. Hooper, that the- confidence of the senate was abused by Mr. Sherman and that by their joint efforts the most important piece of legislation of the century was carried through congress by stealth and the double standard, which had existed by the will of the people for more than eighty years, was was taken away 'from them without , their consent or knowledge, in the in- : terests of aliens, by the manipulations . herein described. I am, very truly i yours. GEORGE C. GORHAM. Washington, D. C., Sept. 5, 1896.