This hope of philosophers and statesmen is now nearer realization than

ever before. If we could contribute to this result it would tend to

promote commerce and intercourse, trade and travel, peace and harmony

among nations. It would be in line with the civilization of our age.

It is by such measures statesmen may keep pace with the marvellous

inventions, improvements, and discoveries which have quadrupled the

capacity of man for production, made lightning subservient to his will,

revealed to him new agencies of power hidden in the earth, and opened

up to his enterprise all the dark places of the world. The people of

the United States boast that they have done their full share in all this

development; that they have grown in population, wealth, and strength;

that they are the richest of nations, with untarnished credit, a model

and example of self-government without kings or princes or lords. Surely

this is no time for a radical change of public policy which seems to

have no motive except to reduce the burden of obligations freely taken,

a change likely to impair our public credit and produce disorder and

confusion in all monetary transactions. Others may see reasons for this

change, but I prefer to stand by the standards of value that come to us

with the approval and sanction of every party that has administered the

Government since its beginning.

JOHN P. JONES,

OF NEVADA. (BORN 1830.)

ON TREASURY NOTES AND SILVER,

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES, MAY 12, 1890.

MR. PRESIDENT, the question now about to be discussed by this body is

in my judgment the most important that has attracted the attention of

Congress or the country since the formation of the Constitution. It

affects every interest, great and small, from the slightest concern of

the individual to the largest and most comprehensive interest of the

nation.

The measure under consideration was reported by me from the Committee on

Finance. It is hardly necessary for me to say, however, that it does not

fully reflect my individual views regarding the relation which silver

should bear to the monetary circulation of the country or of the world.

I am, at all times and in all places, a firm and unwavering advocate of

the free and unlimited coinage of silver, not merely for the reason that

silver is as ancient and honorable a money metal as gold, and equally

well adapted for the money use, but for the further reason that, looking

at the annual yield from the mines, the entire supply that can come to

the mints will at no time be more than is needed to maintain at a

steady level the prices of commodities among a constantly increasing

population.

* * * * *

History gives evidence of no more prolific source of human misery than a

persistent and long continued fall in the general range of prices.

But, although exercising so pernicious an influence, it is not itself a

cause, but an effect.

When a fall of prices is found operating, not on one article or class of

articles alone, but on the products of all industries; when found to

be not confined to any one climate, country, or race of people, but to

diffuse itself over the civilized world; when it is found not to be a

characteristic of any one year, but to go on progressively for a series

of years, it becomes manifest that it does not and can not arise from

local, temporary, or subordinate causes, but must have its genesis and

development in some principle of universal application.

What, then, is it that produces a general decline of prices in any

country? It is produced by a shrinkage in the volume of money relatively

to population and business, which has never yet failed to cause an

increase in the value of the money unit, and a consequent decrease in

the price of the commodities for which such unit is exchanged. If the

volume of money in circulation be made to bear a direct and steady ratio

to population and business, prices will be maintained at a steady level,

and, what is of supreme importance, money will be kept of unchanging

value. With an advancing civilization, in which a large volume of

business is conducted on a basis of credit extending over long periods,

it is of the uttermost importance that money, which is the measure of

all equities, should be kept unchanging in value through time.

A reduction in the volume of money relatively to population and

business, or, (to state the proposition in another form) a volume which

remains stationary while population and business are increasing, has the

effect of increasing the value of each unit of money, by increasing its

purchasing power.

* * * * *

We have 22,000,000 workmen in this country. In order that they may be

kept uninterruptedly employed it is absolutely necessary that business

contracts and obligations be made long in advance. Accordingly, we read

almost daily of the inception of industrial undertakings requiring years

to fulfil. It is not too much to say that the suspension for one season

of the making of time-contracts would close the factories, furnaces, and

machine-shops of all civilized countries.

The natural concomitant of such a system of industry is the elaborate

system of debt and credit which has grown up with it, and is

indispensable to it. Any serious enhancement in the value of the unit of

money between the time of making a contract or incurring a debt and the

date of fulfilment or maturity always works hardship and frequently ruin

to the contractor or debtor.

Three fourths of the business enterprises of this country are conducted

on borrowed capital. Three fourths of the homes and farms that stand in

the name of the actual occupants have been bought on time, and a very

large proportion of them are mortgaged for the payment of some part of

the purchase money.

Under the operation of a shrinkage in the volume of money this enormous

mass of borrowers, at the maturity of their respective debts, though

nominally paying no more than the amount borrowed, with interest, are,

in reality, in the amount of the principal alone, returning a percentage

of value greater than they received--more than in equity they contracted

to pay, and oftentimes more, in substance, than they profited by the

loan. To the man of business this percentage in many cases constitutes

the difference between success and failure. Thus a shrinkage in the

volume of money is the prolific source of bankruptcy and ruin. It is the

canker that, unperceived and unsuspected, is eating out the prosperity

of our people. By reason of the almost universal inattention to the

nature and functions of money this evil is permitted, unobserved, to

work widespread ruin and disaster. So subtle is it in its operations

that it eludes the vigilance of the most acute. It baffles all foresight

and calculation; it sets at naught all industry, all energy, all

enterprise.

* * * * *

The advocates of the single gold standard deem even silver money much

better money than greenbacks. Does it then follow that when greenbacks

were our only money--good enough money to carry our nation through the

greatest war in all history--we were "along-side" or underneath the

barbarous nations of the world? It is not the form or material of a

nation's money that fixes its status relatively to other nations. That

is accomplished by the vitality, the energy, the intellectuality and

effective force of its people. The United States can never be placed

"alongside" any barbarous nation, except by compelling our people to

compete with barbarous peoples--compelling them to sell the products of

American labor at prices regulated by the cost of labor and manner of

living in barbarous countries. As well might it be said that we are

alongside the barbarous people of India because we continue to produce

wheat and cotton.

The distinguishing feature of all barbarous nations is the squalor of

their working classes. The reward of their hard toil is barely enough

to maintain animal existence. A civilized people are placed alongside

a barbarous one when, in their means of livelihood, the foundation of

their civilization, they are made to compete with the barbarians. That

was the result accomplished for the farmers and planters of the United

States when silver was demonetized.

* * * * *

It is a remarkable circumstance, Mr. President, that throughout the

entire range of economic discussion in gold-standard circles, it seems

to be taken for granted that a change in the value of the money unit is

a matter of no significance, and imports no mischief to society, so long

as the change is in one direction. Who has ever heard from an Eastern

journal any complaint against a contraction of our money volume; any

admonition that in a shrinking volume of money lurk evils of the utmost

magnitude? On the other hand, we have been treated to lengthy homilies

on the evils of "inflation," whenever the slightest prospect presented

itself to a decrease in the value of money--not with the view of giving

the debtor an advantage over the lender of money, but of preventing the

unconscionable injustice of a further increasing value in the dollars

which the debtor contracted to pay. Loud and re-sounding protests have

been entered against the "dishonesty" of making payments in "depreciated

dollars." The debtors are characterized as dishonest for desiring to

keep money at a steady and unwavering value. If that object could be

secured, it would undoubtedly be to the interest of the debtor, and

could not possibly work any injustice to the creditor. It would simply

assure to both debtor and creditor the exact measure for which they

bargained. It would enable the debtor to pay his debt with exactly the

amount of sacrifice to which, on the making of the debt, he undertook to

submit, in order to pay it.

In all discussions of the subject the creditors attempt to brush aside

the equities involved by sneering at the debtors. But, Mr. President,

debt is the distinguishing characteristic of modern society. It is

through debt that the marvellous developments of the nineteenth-century

civilization have been effected. Who are the debtors in this country?

Who are the borrowers of money? The men of enterprise, of energy, of

skill, the men of industry, of fore-sight, of calculation, of daring.

In the ranks of the debtors will be found a large preponderance of the

constructive energy of every country. The debtors are the upbuilders of

the national wealth and prosperity; they are the men of initiative, the

men who conceive plans and set on foot enterprises. They are those who

by borrowing money enrich the community. They are the dynamic force

among the people. They are the busy, restless, moving throng whom you

find in all walks of life in this country--the active, the vigorous, the

strong, the undaunted.

These men are sustained in their efforts by the hope and belief that

their labors will be crowned with success. Destroy that hope and you

take away from society the most powerful of all the incentives to

material development; you place in the pathway of progress an obstacle

which it is impossible to surmount.

The men of whom I have spoken are undoubtedly the first who are likely

to be affected by a shrinkage in the volume of money.

The highest prosperity of a nation is attained only when all its people

are employed in avocations suited to their individual aptitudes, and

when a just money system insures an equitable distribution of the

products of their industry. With our present complex civilization, in

order that men may have constant employment, it is indispensable that

work be planned and undertakings projected years in advance. Without

an intelligent forecast of enterprises large numbers of workmen must

periodically be relegated to idleness. Enterprises that take years to

complete must be contracted for in advance, and payments provided for.

A constant but unperceived rise in the value of the dollar with which

those payments must be made, baffles all plans, thwarts all calculation,

and destroys all equities between debtor and creditor. If we cannot

intelligently regulate our money volume so as to maintain unchanging

the value of the money unit, if we cannot preserve our people from the

blighting effects which an increase in the measuring power of the

money unit entails upon all industry, to what purpose is our boasted

civilization?

By the increase of that measuring power all hopes are disappointed, all

purposes baffled, all efforts thwarted, all calculations defied. This

subtle enlargement in the measuring power of the unit of money (the

dollar) affects every class of the working community. Like a poisonous

drug in the human body, it permeates every vein, every artery, every

fibre and filament of the industrial structure. The debtor is fighting

for his life against an enemy he does not see, against an influence

he does not understand. For, while his calculations were well and

intelligently made, and the amount of his debts and the terms of his

contracts remain the same, the weight of all his obligations has been

increased by an insidious increase in the value of the money unit.

* * * * *

In an ancient village there once stood a gold clock, which, ever since

the invention of clocks, had been the measure of time for the people

of that village. They were proud of its beauty, its workmanship, its

musical stroke, and the unfailing regularity with which it heralded the

passing hours. This clock had been endeared to all the inhabitants of

the village by the hallowed associations with which it was identified.

Generation after generation it had called the children from far and wide

to attend the village school; its fresh morning peal had set the honest

villagers to labor; its noonday notes had called them to refreshment;

its welcome evening chime had summoned them to rest.

From time immemorial, on all festive occasions, it had rung out its

merry tones to assemble the young people on the green; and on the

Sabbath it had advertised to all the countryside the hour of worship in

the village church. So perfect was its mechanism that it never needed

repair. So proud were the people of this wonderful clock that it became

the standard for all the country round about, and the time which it kept

came to be known as the gold standard of time, which was universally

admitted to be correct and unchanging.

In the course of time there wandered that way a queer character,

a clock-maker, who being fully instructed in the inner workings of

time-tellers, and not having inherited the traditions of that village,

did not regard this clock with the veneration accorded to it by the

natives. To their astonishment he denied that there was really any

such thing as a gold standard of time; and in order to prove that the

material, gold, did not monopolize all the qualities characteristic of

clocks, he placed alongside the gold clock, another clock, of silver,

and set both clocks at 12 noon. For a long time the clocks ran along

in almost perfect accord, their only disagreement being that of an

occasional second or two, and even that disagreement only at rare

intervals, such as might naturally occur with the best of clocks. But

the Council of the village, in their admiration for the gold clock,

passed an ordinance requiring that all the weights (the motive power) of

the silver clock, except one, be removed from it, and attached to those

of the gold clock. Instantly the clocks began to fall apart, and one

day, as the sun was passing the meridian, the hands of the gold clock

were observed to indicate the hour of 1, while those of the silver clock

indicated 12.15. At this everybody in the village ridiculed the

silver clock, derided the silver standard, and hurled epithets at the

individual who had had the temerity to doubt the infallibility of the

gold standard.

Finally, the divergence between the clocks went so far that it was noon

by the gold standard when it was only 6 A.M. by the silver standard, so

that those who were guided by the gold standard, notwithstanding that it

was yet the gray of the morning, insisted on eating their mid-day meal,

because the gold standard indicated that it must be noon. And when

the sun was high in the heavens, and its light was shining warm and

refulgent on the dusty streets of the village, those who observed the

gold standard had already eaten supper and were preparing for bed.

But this state of things could not last. It was clear that the

difference between the standards must be reconciled, or all industry

would be disarranged and the village ruined.

Discussion was rife among the villagers as to the cause of the

difference. Some said the silver clock had lost time; others that both

clocks had lost time, but the silver clock more than the gold; while

others again asserted that both clocks had gained time, but that the

gold clock had gained more than the silver clock.

While this discussion was at its height a philosopher came along and

observing the excitement on the subject remarked: "By measuring two

things, one against the other, you can never arrive at any determination

as to which has changed. Instead of disputing as to whether one clock

has lost or another gained would it not be well to consult the sun and

the stars and ascertain exactly what has happened?"

Some demurred to this because, as they asserted, the gold standard was

unchanging and was always right no matter how much it might seem to be

wrong; others agreed that the philosopher's advice should be taken.

Upon consulting the sun and the stars it was discovered that what had

happened was that both clocks had gained in time but that the gain of

the silver clock had been very slight, while that of the gold clock had

been so great as to disturb all industry and destroy all correct sense

of time.

Nothwithstanding this demonstration, there were many who adhered to the

belief that the gold standard was correct and unchanging, and insisted

that what appeared to be its aberrations were not in reality due to any

fault of the gold clock, but to some convulsion of nature by which

the solar system had been disarranged and the planets made to move

irregularly in their orbits.

Some of the people also remembered having heard at the village inn, from

travellers returning from the East, that silver clocks were the standard

of time in India and other barbarous countries, while in countries of a

more advanced civilization gold clocks were the standard. They therefore

feared that the use of the silver clock might have the effect of

degrading the civilization of the village by placing it alongside India

and other barbarous countries. And although the great mass of the people

really believed, from the demonstration made, that the silver standard

of time was the better one, yet this objection was so momentous that

they were puzzled what course to pursue, and at last advices were

consulting the manufacturers of gold clocks as to what was best to be

done.

Now our gold standard men are in the position of those who first refuse

to look at anything beyond the two things, gold and silver, to see what

has happened, and who, when it is finally demonstrated that all other

things retain their former relations to silver, still persist that the

law which makes gold an unchanging standard of measure is more immutable

than that which holds the stars in their courses. If they will compare

gold and silver with commodities in general, to see how the metals have

maintained their relations, not to one another but to all other things,

they will find that instead of a fall having taken place in the value of

silver, the change that has really taken place is a rise in the value of

both gold and silver, the rise in silver being relatively slight, while

that of gold has been ruinously great. And those who do not shut their

eyes to the truth must see that the change of relation between the

metals has been effected by depriving silver of its legal-tender

function, as the want of accord between the clocks was brought about

by depriving the silver clock of a portion of its motive power--the

weights. The only thing that has prevented a greater divergency between

the metals is the limited coinage by the United States--the single

weight that, withheld from the gold clock, prevented its more ruinous

gain.

* * * * *

Everybody admits that the value of all other things is regulated by the

play against each other of the forces of supply and demand. No reason

has been or can be given why the value of the unit of money is not

subject to this law.

The demand for money is equivalent to the sum of the demands for all

other things whatsoever, for it is through a demand first made on

money that all the wants of man are satisfied. The demand for money is

instant, constant, and unceasing, and is always at a maximum. If any man

wants a pair of shoes, or a suit of clothes, he does not make his demand

first on the shoemaker, or clothier. No man, except a beggar, makes a

demand directly for food, clothes, or any other article. Whether it be

to obtain clothing, food, or shelter--whether the simplest necessity

or the greatest luxury of life--it is on money that the demand is first

made. As this rule operates throughout the entire range of commodities

it is manifest that the demand for money equals at least the united

demands for all other things.

While population remains stationary, the demand for money will remain

the same. As the demand for one article becomes less, the demand for

some other which shall take its place becomes greater. The demand for

money, therefore, must ever be as pressing and urgent as the needs of

man are varied, incessant, and importunate.

Such being the demand for money, what is the supply? It is the total

number of units of money in circulation (actual or potential) in any

country.

The force of the demand for money operating against the supply is

represented by the earnest, incessant struggle to obtain it. All men, in

all trades and occupations, are offering either property or services

for money. Each shoemaker in each locality is in competition with every

other shoemaker in the same locality, each hatter is in competition

with every other hatter, each clothier with every other clothier, all

offering their wares for units of money. In this universal and perpetual

competition for money, that number of shoemakers that can supply the

demand for shoes at the smallest average price (excellence of quality

being taken into account) will fix the market value of shoes in money;

and conversely, will fix the value of money in shoes. So with the

hatters as to hats, so with the tailors as to clothes, and so with those

engaged in all other occupations as to the products respectively of

their labor.

The transcendent importance of money, and the constant pressure of the

demand for it, may be realized by comparing its utility with that of any

other force that contributes to human welfare.

In all the broad range of articles that in a state of civilization are

needed by man, the only absolutely indispensable thing is money. For

everything else there is some substitute--some alternative; for money

there is none. Among articles of food, if beef rises in price, the

demand for it will diminish, as a certain proportion of the people will

resort to other forms of food. If, by reason of its continued scarcity,

beef continues to rise, the demand will further diminish, until finally

it may altogether cease and centre on something else. So in the matter

of clothing. If any one fabric becomes scarce, and consequently dear,

the demand will diminish, and, if the price continue rising, it is only

a question of time for the demand to cease and be transferred to some

alternative.

But this cannot be the case with money. It can never be driven out of

use. There is not, and there never can be, any substitute for it. It

may become so scarce that one dollar at the end of a decade may buy ten

times as much as at the beginning; that is to say, it may cost in labor

or commodities ten times as much to get it, but at whatever cost, the

people must have it. Without money the demands of civilization could not

be supplied.

GEORGE WILLIAM CURTIS,

OF NEW YORK (BORN 1824, DIED 1892.)

ON THE SPOILS SYSTEM AND THE PROGRESS OF CIVIL SERVICE REFORM.

An Address delivered before the American Social Science Association at

its Meeting in Saratoga, New York, September 8, 1881.

American Eloquence, Volume 4 Studies In American Political History (1897) · 第 16 / 19 段