The retirement of the greenbacks was begun soon after the war. On April

12, 1866, an Act authorized the Secretary of the Treasury to retire and

cancel not more than $10,000,000 of these notes within six months of the

passage of the Act, and $4,000,000 per month thereafter. This policy of

contraction was carried out by Secretary McCulloch, who urged still more

rapid contraction; but the policy was resisted by a large influence in

the country, and on February 4, 1868, an Act of Congress suspending the

authority of the Secretary of the Treasury to retire and cancel United

States notes, became a law without the signature of the President.

On March 18, 1869, an "Act to strengthen the public credit" was passed,

which declared that the "greenbacks" were redeemable in coin. This Act

concluded as follows: "And the United States also solemnly pledges

its faith to make provision at the earliest practicable period for the

redemption of the United States notes in coin."

On January 14, 1875, the "Resumption Act" was passed. It declared that

"on and after January 1, 1879, the Secretary of the Treasury shall

redeem in coin the United States legal-tender notes then outstanding,

on their presentation for redemption at the office of the Assistant

Treasurer of the United States in the city of New York, in sums of

not less than fifty dollars." The same Act provided that while the

legal-tender notes outstanding remained in excess of $300,000,000, the

Secretary of the Treasury should redeem such notes to the amount of 80

per cent. of the increase in National Bank notes issued.

On May 31, 1878, an Act was passed forbidding the further retirement of

United States legal-tender notes, and providing that "when any of said

notes may be redeemed or be received into the Treasury under any law

from any source whatever and shall belong to the United States, they

shall not be retired, cancelled, or destroyed, but they shall be

re-issued and paid out again and kept in circulation." When this Act was

passed there were $346,681,016 of United States notes outstanding, and

there has been no change in the amount since.

As to the silver policy of the Government since the war it is expected

that the purport of certain important acts of legislation should be

understood by all who would have an intelligent conception of our

financial controversies.

The Act of February 12, 1873, suspended the coinage of the standard

silver dollar of 412 and 1/2 grains. This Act authorized the coinage of

the trade dollar of 420 grains, making it a legal tender for $5. This

is the Act which has been called the "crime of 1873," on which tomes of

controversy have been called forth. It is discussed at some length in

the speech of Mr. Morrill, found in our text.

On February 28, 1878, the Bland-Allison Act was passed over the veto of

President Hayes. A bill providing for the free and unlimited coinage

of silver, of 412 and 1/2 grains to the dollar, had passed the House

in November, 1877, under a suspension of the rules. At this time the

bullion in the silver dollar was worth about 92 cents. When the Bland

free-coinage Act came to the Senate, it was amended there on report

of Senator Allison, of Iowa, Chairman of the Finance Committee of

the Senate, by a provision that the Government should purchase from

$2,000,000 to $4,000,000 worth of silver bullion for coinage into

dollars. Holders of the coin were authorized to deposit the same with

the United States Treasurer and to receive therefor certificates of

deposit, known as silver certificates. These certificates are not legal

tender, although receivable for customs, taxes, and all public dues, and

are redeemable only in silver. This Act called forth an exhaustive

and able debate. Senator Morrill, of Vermont, opened the debate in

opposition to silver coinage. Senator Beck, of Kentucky, was one of

the ablest advocates of silver coinage, while Mr. Blaine made a notable

contribution to the debate, in which he favored the unlimited coinage of

a silver dollar of 425 grains. Preceding the Congressional action there

had been much public discussion on the subject throughout the country.

A Monetary Commission had been organized, by joint resolution of August

15, 1875, for the purpose of making an examination into the silver

question. This Commission made an exhaustive report to Congress on March

2, 1877, the majority of the Commission recommending the resumption of

silver coinage. Also, previous to the discussion of the Bland-Allison

Act in the Senate, the celebrated Matthews Resolution was passed by that

body. This asserted that "all bonds of the United States are payable in

silver dollars of 412 and 1/2 grains, and that to restore such dollars

as a full legal tender for that purpose, is not in violation of public

faith or the rights of the creditors." The de-bate on this resolution

was a notable one. It was chiefly under these aspects that the financial

question was discussed in the years 1877-1878.

The Bland-Allison Act was in operation from 1878 to 1890, during which

time $2,000,000 in silver were coined per month, the minimum amount

authorized by law. On July 14, 1890, the so-called Sherman Act stopped

the coinage of silver dollars and provided for the purchase of silver

bullion to the amount of 4,500,000 ounces per month. Against this

bullion Treasury notes were to be issued, redeemable in gold or silver

coin at the option of the Secretary of the Treasury. These notes were

made a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and private, and

receivable for all customs, taxes, and all public dues. It was also

declared in this Act to be the established policy of the United States

to maintain the two metals on a parity with each other upon the present

legal ratio, or such ratio as may be provided by law. On account of this

language in the law the Secretary of the Treasury under Mr. Cleveland

has not deemed it advisable to exercise the discretion which the law

gives him to redeem these notes in silver, and these new Treasury notes

have been treated as gold obligations. By November 1, 1893, when the

silver purchase clause of the Act of July 14, 1890, was repealed,

Treasury notes to the amount of $155,000,000 had been issued, though

some of these have since been exchanged for silver dollars at the option

of the holders. It has been by these Treasury notes and the outstanding

greenbacks that gold has been withdrawn from the Treasury, thus

depleting the gold reserve and making bond issues necessary. It has

been deemed advisable by successive administrations of the Treasury

Department to maintain a gold reserve of $100,000,000 against the

$346,681,000 outstanding greenbacks, though no law requires that such

a reserve should be maintained further than that the Act of March 18,

1869, pledges the faith of the United States that its outstanding notes

should be redeemed in coin.

The repeal of the silver purchase clause of the Sherman Act was

accomplished in a special session of Congress, November 1, 1893. Since

this repeal, the silver policy of the Government has been as it

was before the Bland-Allison Act of 1878, which involves a complete

suspension of silver coinage. The Acts of 1878 and of 1890 were

compromise measures, agreed to by the opponents of silver coinage in

order to prevent the passage of a bill providing for full unlimited

coinage of silver at the ratio of 16 to 1. Speaking in his

_Recollections_ of the situation in 1890, Senator Sherman says: "The

situation at that time was critical. A large majority of the Senate

favored free silver, and it was feared that the small majority against

it in the other House might yield and agree to it. The silence of the

President on the matter gave rise to an apprehension that if a free

coinage bill should pass both Houses he would not feel at liberty to

veto it. Some action had to be taken to prevent a return to free silver

coinage, and the measure evolved was the best obtainable. I voted for

it, but the day it became a law I was ready to repeal it, if repeal

could be had without substituting in its place absolute free coinage."

Since 1893 the contention has been carried on by the silver men in a

public agitation in favor of free silver coinage, without compromise or

international agreement, and this year (1896), by our form of political

referendum, the question has been referred to the people for decision.

We have attempted to include four representative orations on this

complex subject, from four of our most prominent public men. The

literature of the subject is unlimited. Mr. Morrill is a representative

advocate of the gold standard. In the same discussion Mr. Blaine offers

a compromise position. Senator Sherman is an international bimetallist

and a pronounced opponent of independent silver coinage. He has given

much attention--probably no one has given more--to financial questions

during a long public life. Senator Jones is recognized as one of the

ablest advocates and one of the deepest students of monetary problems

on the free silver side of the controversy. The extracts from these

speeches will indicate the merits of the long debate on silver

coinage,--the greatest question in our financial history in a quarter of

a century.

The reform of the Civil Service has been a subject of public attention

especially since 1867. The public service of the United States is

divided into three branches, the civil, military, and naval. By the

civil service we mean that which is neither military nor naval, and it

comprises all the offices by which the civil administration is carried

on. The struggle for Civil Service Reform has been an effort to

substitute what is known as the "Merit System" for what is known as the

"Spoils System"; to require that appointment to public office should

depend, not upon the applicant's having rendered a party service, but

upon his fitness to render a public service. It would seem that the

establishment in public practice of so obvious a principle should

require no contest or agitation; and that the civil service should ever

have been perverted and that a long struggle should be necessary to

reform it, are to be explained only in connection with a modern party

organization and a party machinery and usage which were entirely

unforeseen by the framers of the Constitution. The practice of the

early administrations was reasonable and natural. Washington required of

applicants for places in the civil service proofs of ability, integrity,

and fitness. "Beyond this," he said, "nothing with me is necessary

or will be of any avail." Washington did not dream that party service

should be considered as a reason for a public appointment. John Adams

followed the example of Washington. Jefferson came into power at the

head of a victorious party which had displaced its opponent after a

bitter struggle. The pressure for places was strong, but Jefferson

resisted it, and he declared in a famous utterance that "the only

questions concerning a candidate shall be, Is he honest? is he capable?

is he faithful to the Constitution?" Madison, Monroe, and John

Quincy Adams followed in the same practice so faithfully that a joint

Congressional Committee was led to say in 1868 that, having consulted

all accessible means of information, they had not learned of a single

removal of a subordinate officer except for cause, from the beginning of

Washington's administration to the close of that of John Quincy Adams.

The change came in 1829 with the accession of Jackson. The Spoils System

was formally proclaimed in 1832. In that year Martin Van Buren was

nominated Minister to England, and, in advocating his confirmation,

Senator Marcy, of New York, first used the famous phrase in reference to

the public officers, "To the victors belong the spoils of the enemy."

Since then every administration has succumbed, in whole or in part,

to the Spoils System. The movement for the reform of the civil service

began in 1867-68, in the 39th and 40th Congresses in investigations and

reports of a Joint Committee on Retrenchment. The reports were made and

the movement led by Hon. Thomas A. Jenckes, a member of the House from

Rhode Island. These reports contained a mass of valuable information

upon the evils of the spoils service. In 1871 an Act, a section of an

appropriation bill, was passed authorizing the President to prescribe

rules for admission to the civil service, to appoint suitable persons

to make inquiries and to establish regulations for the conduct of

appointees. Mr. George William Curtis was at the head of the Civil

Service Commission appointed by General Grant under this Act, and on

December 18, 1871, the Commission made a notable report, written by Mr.

Curtis, on the evils of the present system and the need of reform. In

April, 1872, a set of rules was promulgated by the Commission regulating

appointments. These rules were suspended in March, 1875, by President

Grant although personally friendly to the reform, because Congress had

refused appropriations for the expenses of the Commission. Appeal

was made to the people through the usual agencies of education and

agitation. President Hayes revised the Civil Service Rules, and Mr.

Schurz, Secretary of the Interior, made notable application of the

principle of the reform in his department. President Garfield recognized

the need of reform, though he asserted that it could be brought about

only through Congressional action. Garfield's assassination by a

disappointed placeman added to the public demand for reform, and on

January, 18, 1883, the Pendleton Civil Service Law was passed. This

Act, which had been pending in the Senate since 1880, provided for

open competitive examinations for admission to the public service in

Washington and in all custom-houses and post-offices where the official

force numbered as many as fifty; for the appointment of a Civil Service

Commission of three members, not more than two of whom shall be of

the same political party; and for the apportionment of appointments

according to the population of the States. Provision was made for a

period of probation before permanent appointment should be made, and no

recommendations from a Senator or member of Congress, except as to

the character or residence of the applicant, should be received or

considered by any person making an appointment or examination. The Act

prohibited political assessments in a provision that "no person shall,

in any room occupied in the discharge of official duties by an officer

or employee of the United States, solicit in any manner whatever any

contribution of money or anything of value, for any political purpose

whatever."

The Pendleton Act was a landmark in the history of the reform and

indicated its certain triumph. The Act was faithfully executed by

President Arthur in the appointment of a Commission friendly to the

cause, and under the Act the Civil Service Rules have since been

extended by Presidents Harrison and Cleveland until the operations of

the reform embrace the greater part of the service, including fully

85,000 appointments. It is not probable that the nation will ever again

return to the feudalism of the Spoils System.

No two men have done more for the cause of Civil Service Reform than

George William Curtis and Carl Schurz. When Mr. Curtis died, in 1892,

the presidency of the Civil Service Reform League, so long held by

him, worthily devolved upon Mr. Schurz. It may be said that in the last

twenty-five years of Mr. Curtis' life is written the history of

this reform. His orations on the subject have enriched our political

literature and they hold up before the young men of America the noblest

ideals of American citizenship. He gave unselfishly of his time and of

his exalted talents to this cause, and his services deserve from his

countrymen the reward due to high and devoted patriotism. Refusing high

and honorable appointments which were held out to him, he preferred to

serve his country by doing what he could to put her public service upon

a worthy plane. The oration from Mr. Curtis included in our text is one

among many of his worthy productions.

J. A. W.

JUSTIN S. MORRILL,

OF VERMONT. (BORN 1810.)

ON THE REMONETIZATION OF SILVER

--UNITED STATES SENATE, JANUARY 28, 1878.

MR. PRESIDENT, the bill now before the Senate provides for the

resuscitation of the obsolete dollar of 412 and 1/2 grains of silver,

which Congress entombed in 1834 by an Act which diminished the weight of

gold coins to the extent of 6.6 per cent., and thus bade a long farewell

to silver. It is to be a dollar made of metal worth now fifty-three and

five-eighths pence per ounce, or ten cents less in value than a

gold dollar, and on January 23d, awkwardly enough, worth eight and

three-fourths cents less than a dollar in greenbacks, gold being only

If per cent. premium, but, nevertheless, to be a legal tender for all

debts, public and private, except where otherwise provided by contract.

The words seem to be aptly chosen to override and annul whatever now

may be otherwise provided by law. Beyond this, as the bill came from the

House, the holders of silver bullion--not the Government or the whole

people--were to have all the profits of coinage and the Government all

of the expense. This, but for the amendment proposed by the Committee on

Finance, would have furnished the power to the enterprising operators in

silver, either at home or abroad, to inflate the currency without limit;

and, even as amended, inflation will be secured to the full extent

of all the silver which may be issued, for there is no provision for

redeeming or retiring a single dollar of paper currency. Labor is

threatened with a continuation of the unequal struggle against a

depreciated and fluctuating standard of money.

The bill, if it becomes a law, must at the very threshold arrest the

resumption of specie payments, for, were the holders of United States

notes suddenly willing to exchange them for much less than their present

value, payment even in silver is to be postponed indefinitely. For years

United States notes have been slowly climbing upward, but now they are

to have a sudden plunge downward, and in every incompleted

contract, great and small, the robbery of Peter to pay Paul is to be

fore-ordained. The whole measure looks to me like a fearful assault upon

the public credit. The losses it will inflict upon the holders of paper

money and many others will be large, and if the bill, without further

radical amendments, obtains the approval of the Senate, it will give

the death-blow to the cardinal policy of the country, which now seeks

a large reduction of the rate of interest upon our national debt.

Even that portion now held abroad will come back in a stampede to be

exchanged for gold at any sacrifice. The ultimate result would be,

when the supply for customs shall have been coined and the first

effervescence has passed away, the emission of silver far below the

standard of gold; and when the people become tired of it, disgusted or

ruined by its instability, as they soon would be, a fresh clamor may

be expected for the remonetization of gold, and another clipping or

debasing of gold coins may follow to bring them again into circulation

on the basis of silver equivalency. In this slippery descent there can

be no stopping place. The consoling philosophy of the silver commission

may then be repealed, that a fall in the value of either or both of the

metals is a "benefaction to mankind." If that were true, then copper,

being more abundant and of lower value, should be used in preference

to either gold or silver. The gravity of these questions will not be

disputed.

The silver question in its various aspects, as involved in the bill

before us, is one of admitted importance, possibly of difficult

solution; and it is further embarrassed by not only the conflicting

views of those entitled to some respect, but by the multifarious

prescriptions intruded by a host of self-constituted experts and by all

of the quack financiers of the land. Every crocheteer and pamphleteer,

cocksure "there's no two ways about it," generously contributes his

advice free of charge; but sound, trust-worthy advice does not roam like

tramps and seldom comes uninvited. Many of the facts which surround

the subject are perhaps of too recent occurrence to justify hasty and

irrevocable conclusions. The service of our own people, however, must

be our paramount concern. Their intercourse with themselves and with

the world should be placed upon the most solid foundation. If any have

silver to sell it is comparatively a small matter, and yet we earnestly

desire that they may obtain for it the highest as well as the most

stable price; but not at the expense of corn, cotton, and wheat; and it

is to be hoped, if any have debts to meet now or hereafter, that they

may meet them with the least inconvenience consistent with plain,

downright, integrity; but, from being led astray by the loud

declamations of those who earn nothing themselves and know no trade but

spoliation of the earnings of others, let them heartily say, "Good Lord,

deliver us."

* * * * *

A stupid charge, heretofore, in the front of debate, has been made,

and wickedly repeated in many places, that the Coinage Act of 1873 was

secretly and clandestinely engineered through Congress without proper

consideration or knowledge of its contents; but it is to be noted that

this charge had its birth and growth years after the passage of the Act,

and not until after the fall of silver. Long ago it was declared by one

of the old Greek dramatists that, "No lie ever grows old." This one is

as fresh and boneless now as at its birth, and is therefore swallowed

with avidity by those to whom such food is nutritious or by those who

have no appetite for searching the documents and records for facts.

Whether the Act itself was right or wrong does not depend upon the

degradation of Congress implied in the original charge. Interested

outsiders may glory in libelling Congress, but why should its own

members? The Act may be good and Congress bad, and yet it is to be hoped

that the latter has not fallen to the level of its traducers. But there

has been no fall of Congress; only a fall of silver. To present the

abundant evidence showing that few laws were ever more openly proposed,

year after year, and squarely understood than the Coinage Act of 1873,

will require but a moment. It had been for years elaborately considered

and reported upon by the Deputy Comptroller of the Currency. The special

attention of Congress was called to the bill and the report by the

Secretary of the Treasury in his annual re-ports for 1870, 1871, and

1872, where the "new features" of the bill, "discontinuing the

coinage of the silver dollar," were fully set forth. The extensive

correspondence of the Department had been printed in relation to the

proposed bill, and widely circulated. The bill was separately printed

eleven times, and twice in reports of the Deputy Comptroller of the

Currency,--thirteen times in all,--and so printed by order of Congress.

A copy of the printed bill was many times on the table of every

Senator, and I now have all of them here before me in large type. It was

considered at much length by the appropriate committees of both Houses

of Congress; and the debates at different times upon the bill in

the Senate filled sixty-six columns of the _Globe_, and in the House

seventy-eight columns of the _Globe_. No argus-eyed debater objected by

any amendment to the discontinuance of the silver dollar. In substance

the bill twice passed each House, and was finally agreed upon and

reported by a very able and trustworthy committee of conference, where

Mr. Sherman, Mr. Scott, and Mr. Bayard appeared on the part of the

Senate. No one who knows anything of those eminent Senators will charge

them with doing anything secretly or clandestinely. And yet more capital

has been made by the silver propagandists out of this groundless charge

than by all of their legitimate arguments.'

* * * * *

American Eloquence, Volume 4 Studies In American Political History (1897) · 第 13 / 19 段