Coinage of Gold and Silver.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The regular order being called for, the morning hour begins at twenty minutes after twelve o'clock.  The pending business in the morning hour is the consideration of a bill reported from the Committee on Mines and Mining, being the bill (H.R. No. 3635) to utilize the product of gold and silver mines, and for other purposes, on which the previous question has been demanded by the gentleman from Missouri, [Mr. Bland.]

Mr. Hale.  The gentleman from Missouri must see by this time, as this is confined to the morning hour, that it is a very easy thing for its passage to be prevented.  I believe it to be a bad bill.  Many believe it is a bad bill and will not consent to its passage.  Now, what does the gentleman gain by forcing it every morning hour where the gentleman is limited to sixty minutes and evidently cannot make any progress with it ?  It only takes up the time of the House to the exclusion of other business in the morning hour.

Mr. Bland.  In answer to the gentleman from Maine, I wish to say that when this injustice of demonetizing silver was perpetrated upon the people of this country filibustering was not resorted to.  The bill, sir, was not read at that desk.  Gentlemen who represent the money-sharks of this country surreptitiously carried the bill through without its reading at the Clerk's desk, and I would be pusillanimous indeed to give up because I am threatened with filibustering performances.  Do gentleman suppose the people of this country will submit to such filibustering as this on a bill in their interest, and not in the interest of the money-sharks of this country ?  Let them filibuster and take the consequence.  Let them continue this fraud if they can by filibustering in this House.  I for one am willing to go before the country demanding the previous question at every opportunity.  I insist on it now.

Many Members.  Regular order !

Mr. Bland.  I am threatened with filibustering.  I shall demand the previous question from now until the end of Congress.

Mr. Pierce.  The statement made that the bill was surreptitiously carried through Congress is not true.  It was nearly three years before Congress and was printed thirteen times.

Mr. Bland.  It was a fraud perpetrated upon the people of this country.  It was never read at that desk.  [Cries of "Regular order."]

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair hopes order will be preserved.

Mr. O'Brien.  Pending the demand for the previous question, I move the House adjourn, and on that motion demand the yeas and nays.

Mr. Pierce, Mr. Fort, and Mr. Bland took the floor and made remarks which were inaudible, the Speaker pro tempore beating his gavel all the while.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair is strongly impressed with the idea that he can make more noise than either of the gentlemen who occupy the floor out of order. [Laughter and applause.]  It is only a waste of breath, as not a word of what they are saying can be heard by the reporters.

Mr. Townsend, of Pennsylvania.  Pending the motion to adjourn, I move that when the House adjourns to-day it adjourn to meet on Tuesday next, and on that motion demand tellers.

Mr. Bland.  I hope gentlemen passing through the tellers will be watched---

The Speaker pro tempore.  Debate is out of order.

Tellers were ordered;  and Mr. Townsend, of Pennsylvania, and Mr. Bland were appointed.

So the House refused to adjourn.

Repeal of Resumption Act.

Mr. Cox [Samuel Sullivan Cox, (1824-1889), N.Y., D; studied law, admitted to the bar; avid reader of the Bible].  I am instructed by the Committee on Banking and Currency, to whom was referred House bill No. 3074, to repeal in part the resumption act of 1875, to report the same back with a substitute, (H.R. No. 4064,) which I ask the Clerk to read.

The Clerk read as follows:

A bill to repeal the resumption-day clause in the resumption act of 1875:

Be it enacted, &c., That the resumption-day clause in section 3 of an act entitled "An act to provide for the resumption of specie payments," approved January 14, 1875, which clause is in the words following, to wit:

"On and after the 1st day of January, 1879, the Secretary of the Treasury shall redeem in coin the United States legal-tender notes then outstanding on then 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 $50"--
be and the same is hereby repealed.

Mr. Cox.  I would state for the information of the House that the Committee on Banking and Currency, consisting of members from both sides of the House, have come to an accommodation as to this debate, to allow one hour and a half, if the House please, for debate on this substitute, and one hour and a half for debate on another measure which I propose to follow this bill.

Mr. Garfield.  What is that other measure ?

Mr. Cox.  It is a concurrent resolution for the appointment of a joint commission to consider the monetary system, which was introduced by the gentleman from Louisiana, [Mr. Gibson.]  If agreeable to both sides of the House, at the end of an hour and a half I propose to call up that concurrent resolution and to have an hour and a half of debate on that also.

Mr. O'Brien.  Before the vote is taken on the other ?

Mr. Cox.  To have the vote taken on the first bill at the end of an hour and a half.  If the House please, I propose to call the previous question on the first bill at the end of an hour and a half, and to call the previous question on the concurrent resolution at the end of another hour and a half.

The Speaker pro tempore.  What distribution of time does the gentleman from New York propose ?

Mr. Cox.  I propose to divide up the time on both sides of the House, an hour and a half on the first bill and an hour and a half on the concurrent resolution.  I do not myself propose to occupy more than five minutes, and the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Kasson] and myself will divide up the time equally between his side of the House and this side of the House.

Mr. Randall.  Three-fourths of an hour on each side ?

Mr. Cox.  Three-fourths of an hour on each side on each proposition.

Mr. O'Brien.  I suggest to the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] to allow two hours' debate on the first bill.  I must object to anything less than two hours, and that I think is little enough.

Mr. Cox.  I have no objection to allowing two hours on the first bill, and an hour on the other.

Mr. Stevenson.  I ask that the resolution of the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. Gibson] may be read.

Mr. Page.  Before that is read, I would like to ask if the Speaker should not divide the time, not according to the side of the House, but among the friends and the opponents of this bill ?  There may be some gentlemen on the opposite side of the House who are opposed to this repeal, and I think the time should be equally divided by the Speaker between the friends and the enemies of this measure.

Mr. Cox.  The arrangement will be satisfactory to gentlemen on that side, for the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Kasson] will have charge of the time.

Mr. Fort.  I reserve any point of order or objection to the concurrent resolution until it is read.

Mr. Cox.  I will send the concurrent resolution to the Clerk's desk to be read.

The Clerk read as follows:

A concurrent resolution for the appointment of a joint commission to consider the monetary system.

Resolved by the House of Representatives, (the Senate concurring,)  That a commission is hereby authorized and constituted, to consist of three Senators, to be appointed by the Senate;  three members of the House of Representatives, to be appointed by the Speaker;  and experts, not exceeding three in number, to be selected by and associated with them, with authority to determine the time and place of meeting, and to take evidence, and whose duty it shall be to inquire---

First, into the change which has taken place in the relative value of gold and silver;  the causes thereof;  whether permanent or otherwise;  the effects thereof upon trade, commerce, finance, and productive interests of the country, and upon the standard of value in this and foreign countries;

Second, into the policy of the restoration of the double standard in this country, and, if restored, what the legal relation between the two coins, silver and gold, should be;

Third, into the policy of continuing legal-tender notes concurrently with the metallic standards, and the effects thereof upon the labor, industries, and wealth of the country;  and,

Fourth, into the best means of providing for facilitating the resumption of specie payments.

And said commission is authorized to employ a stenographer, and shall report on or before the 15th day of January, 1877, with the evidence taken by them and such recommendations for legislation as they may deem proper.

Mr. Fort.  I desire to reserve whatever point of order may lie against that concurrent resolution requiring its first consideration in the Committee of the Whole.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The concurrent resolution is not now before the House for action;  it has been read simply for information.

Mr. Lawrence.  Is it the purpose of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] reporting this bill to allow amendments to be offered to it ?

Mr. Cox.  The committee have instructed me to deny all requests for the offering of amendments in the House.

Mr. Lawrence.  And you do not propose to fix any time for resumption ?

Mr. Cox.  The .committee propose simply the measure introduced, without amendment.  It is for the House to decide, in voting upon the previous question, whether it will allow amendments or not.  That is not for the committee or myself to decide.

Mr. Lawrence.  And it is not proposed to adopt any means looking to resumption ?

The Speaker pro tempore.  The House in voting upon seconding the demand for the previous question will decide whether it desires to amend the bill or not.

Mr. Morrison.  I wish to offer as an additional section an amendment to this bill, making preparations for resumption of specie payment.  I desire to know from the gentleman from New York [Mr. Cox] whether he will allow such an amendment ?

Mr. Cox [Samuel Sunset Cox (1824-1889) N.Y., D.; studied law, admitted to the bar].  I am not authorized by the committee to make any such arrangement, and with all respect for my friend from Illinois, I cannot agree to it without the consent of that committee.

Mr. Hewitt, of New York [Abram Stevens Hewitt (1822-1903), N.Y., D.; studied law admitted to the bar; Peter Cooper's son-in-law].  I desire to offer a substitute.  I would like to know from my colleague whether he will allow me to offer a substitute ?

Mr. Cox.  I must give my colleague the same answer that I have given to the gentleman from Illinois.  I have no objection to having the gentleman's amendment read for the information of the House, but I do not propose to yield for any amendment.

Mr. Speaker, the House will understand that, in presenting these two measures, it is not intended that the one should be an amendment or substitute for the other.  The bill now pending provides simply for the repeal of the resumption-day clause in the act of January 14, 1875.  The other measure is a concurrent resolution.  It is not in any sense a substitute for this bill.  It has no relation to the substance of the bill.  It is no more germane to it than is an inquiry germane to a conclusion.  One raises a commission;  the other is a consummated measure.

Mr. Speaker, in bringing this measure before the House I am fully aware that it is presented at the end of a long and tedious discussion in the committee reporting it, as well as in the House, press, and country.  This discussion has aroused not only partisan feeling during this presidential year, but a great deal of ratiocination and sophistry among fiscal minds.  For many months it seemed impossible to solve any of these troublesome problems, at least during this session of Congress.

The concurrent resolution for the appointment of a commission to consider questions connected with the currency is in the line of precedents, in France, in Germany, and in England, as well as in this country, that men who are experts should be associated with legislators in order to give this coin and resumption question a careful, thorough, and exhaustive study before further legislation is demanded.

Upon one thing I think all should agree, that the act fixing January 1, 1879, as the day for specie resumption is hopeless of execution and a standing threat to our prosperity.  What possible good to the business interests of the country has it effected ?  What practical purposes has it subserved in arousing dormant or dead energy ?  Our best business men have answered and have said to our committee that resumption on that day is a chimera.  We had before us many practical men and bankers.  I recall one whom we questioned.  He was a Mr. Hall, of Boston.  He was the head of the bankers' convention of the United States which met a year or more ago at Saratoga.  The question was asked him, "Can we resume at the day fixed ?"  He answered, as almost every intelligent, thoughtful man has answered, "No, sir;  there has not been proper preparation therefor, and it is impossible to reach resumption at that time."  Go outside of the politicians and ask the question, and you will find the same honest response.  Let us deal fairly with our people.  The attempt or pretense to do a hopeless thing arouses needless apprehension, helps speculation at the expense of industry, and cannot impress the people with either our sense of wisdom or our regard for their interests.

Mr. Speaker, this financial problem is a hard one to solve.  We may have to make sacrifices many and great before we reach the real solution of specie resumption.  Although all parties may seem to look toward that grand goal of prosperity when there shall be no irredeemable paper, yet one thing is as sure as anything of record in the American archives, that since the act of January 14, 1875, not one single prescript, order, effort, or paper can be found connected officially with the Government which helps resumption to a real conclusion.  All our public conduct negatives the idea that we can reach specie resumption on the 1st of January, 1879.  The last report of the Secretary of the Treasury, which I have before me, gives no uncertain sound.  It is a confession of impotency in that direction.  The President of the United States himself ---why, did he not himself when he signed this act providing for the resumption of specie resumption look upon the act as a make-shift and an illusion ?  He said:

I venture upon this unusual method of conveying the notice of approval to the "House in which the measure originated," because of its great importance to the country at large, and in order to suggest further legislation which seems to me essential to make this law effective.

It is a subject of congratulation that a measure has become law which fixes a date when specie resumption shall commence, and implies an obligation on the part of Congress ---if in its power--- to give such legislation as may prove necessary to redeem this promise.

Where is the proposed legislation, the "further legislation," to make the law essentially effective ?  How has Congress redeemed the promise and performed the obligation ?  Was it "in its power ?"  If so;  why has not the legislation been suggested here or in the Senate by the friends of the Chief Executive ?  O, but it may he said that the late Secretary of the Treasury has shown us the path to resumption !  Has he ?  If so, it will be found in his last report;  and if in that report, it ought to have been supplemented with essential legislation.  That report is before me.  On its twentieth page the Secretary tells us that he must have the accumulation of a large amount of gold to avert the possibility of failure !  Of course such an amount, he tells us, can only be procured with difficulty.  This we know, for do we not export it in large quantities as well for our bond interest as otherwise ?  Does he not remind us that it would embarrass our own trade and commerce and that of other countries ?  Do we not know what he means ?  But let me quote with emphatic italics:

The act in question not only makes express provision for resumption at a fixed date, but commits the Government to the use of all such means as may be needful to that end.  If experience shall show that the means provided by Congress need to be supplemented by further legislation for the easier and more certain accomplishment of the end, it must be assured that Congress will not suffer the great purpose to be impeded for want of such additional legislation.  The act confers large powers on the Secretary of the Treasury, touching the issue of United States bonds for the purpose of procuring the supply of gold necessary to execute such of its provisions as go into immediate operation, and to provide for the redemption in gold of United States notes outstanding on and after the 1st of January, 1879.  In this respect the power conferred on the Secretary is ample;  but if, for any cause, it should be found unpracticable to accumulate in the Treasury a sufficient amount of gold to carry out the provisions of the act, the Secretary is left without the choice of other means to accomplish the end.  It may, perhaps, be doubted whether the process of accumulating a large amount of gold by a given time could go on without meeting opposition from the financial powers of the world.  It is safe to say that so large an amount of gold as would be required to carry out the purpose and direction of the act cannot be suddenly acquired.  It can be done only by gradual processes, and by taking advantage of favorable conditions of the money market from time to time.

The loss of interest on large sums hoarded in the Treasury for a considerable period in advance of January, 1879, is a consideration not to be disregarded, although it should not be permitted to outweigh the benefits to result from full and complete execution of the act.

But the House is already familiar with these recommendations.  We know their inner significance.  They show how impossible it is in the nature of the business interests of this western hemisphere and the other to collect the amount of coin sufficient to reach resumption on the 1st day of January, 1879.  No provision has been made for it and no provision can be made for it.  The act, a part of which we would repeal, is an act for resumption with resumption left out.  Not one step has been taken to make good the often-repeated promise.  The promise has been broken so often that it is a hinderance, not a help;  as such it should be repealed.  The act a portion of which we now propose to repeal was passed, as we all know, hastily.  It was passed, as it was confessed at the time, as a party necessity, under the whip and spur of the previous question.  Yet the vote upon it was not altogether a partisan vote.  The record I have here before me.  It is on page 318 of January 7,1875.  It shows that some of the best business men on the other side of the House, men like the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Townsend,] the gentlemen from Massachusetts, [Mr. Pierce and Mr. Hoar,] and others whom I could name on that side, are among the 106 noes against the 125 ayes.  Such sagacious men disfavored this measure at the time.  But it was driven through to meet a party emergency;  but no such emergency either at Cincinnati or elsewhere has been able to re-enforce it either by the Senate or by the House, and not even by the urgent entreaty of Ex-Secretary Bristow or President Grant.

My friend from Maine [Mr. Hale] proposed at the beginning of this session a joint resolution which is before me.  I ask to insert it:

December 15, 1875.

Mr. Hale submitted the following;  which was referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency:

"Whereas the country is suffering under the evils of an irredeemable currency, which causes uncertainty in business and stimulates speculation, to the prejudice of legitimate business and labor;  and whereas both political parties in the United States stand co-committed against repudiation and in favor of a speedy return to specie payments;  and whereas Congress established a like policy in the act of March 16, 1869, which was followed by tbe act of January 14, 1875, providing for the resumption of specie payments on the 1st day of January, 1879:  Therefore,

"Resolved, That in the judgment of this House prompt legislative measures should be taken to render said act of January 14, 1875, effective by placing in the hands of the Secretary of the Treasury whatever power may be necessary to that end."

Attest:
Goerge M. Adams, Clerk

I could not report this back because there was a motion to reconsider;  and pending that the committee could not consider the resolution.  Whether it was intended in earnest or simply for rhetorical purposes, perhaps to enable his distinguished colleague [Mr. Blaine] to make a speech on the specie question in the early part of the session, I do not know.  Nevertheless it was referred to our committee, and we waited for the judgment of this House or the gentleman to take "prompt legislative measures to render the act of January 14, 1875, effective by placing in the hands of the Secretary of the Treasury whatever power may be necessary to that end."  We waited in vain.

No, sir, nothing has ever been proposed to that end.  Nothing acceptable has been brought forward or sent to us by the Senate.

I do not speak out of order when I say that the Committee on Banking and Currency, which has been perhaps one of the best-abused committees of this Congress, have considered every possible condition, every proviso, all sorts of substitutes and amendments, if possible to re-enforce this act which would give us specie ostensibly on the 1st of January, 1879.  But all in vain.

At the last meeting of our committee we endeavored in part to solve finally the difficult problem of the session.  For months fruitlessly we endeavored to report an affirmative substitute for the repeal of the inconsequential act of January 14, 1875, which only seemingly prepared for resumption.  When we failed in that, and when from no party there came any project for the re-enforcement of that act, we had leave to report at any time for the action of this House.  I have favored any report which would bring the House to a vote on the repeal.  The chairman of this committee is not therefore responsible for any delay or failure.  He asks leave to say as much to this House, which has graciously honored the committee by an unusual privilege, giving as his reason for this action that the law proposed to be repealed is a futile menace and a delusive hope, impossible of execution, and no help, but a "hinderance" to specie resumption.

What then remains ?  To strike out of this bill the day fixed;  to strike out of the bill the hopeless menace to our business, so if possible to give an impulse to prosperity.  Let us at least, if we can do nothing more, brush away the rubbish, so as to build on sure foundations for a prosperous future in which coin shall play its indispensable and capital part in the exchanges and business of our country.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I intended only in opening this debate to take five minutes of the time of the House.  I yield now to the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Goode,] who will follow in favor of the proposition.  After that I will yield to the gentleman from Iowa, [Mr. Kasson,] who will parcel out the same time to the opponents of the measure.

Mr. Goode.  It will be impossible, Mr. Speaker, in the space allotted to me by my friend from New York to discuss this question.  Nor do I deem it necessary to do so.  The bill is a very plain and simple one in its provisions.  It provides simply for the repeal of that portion of the third section of the so-called resumption law which fixes the 1st day of January, 1879, as the day for the commencement of the resumption of specie payments;  that is all.  It is conceded now, sir, I believe on nearly all hands that this so-called resumption law cannot be carried into effect at the time indicated.

The Secretary of the Treasury, in his last annual report, informs the House that additional legislation is necessary before it can be carried into operation;  and the President, in his last annual message, confesses his inability to suggest what that legislation shall be.  Notwithstanding this so-called resumption law, originated in a caucus of the republican party and was forced through Congress as a measure under the operation of the previous question---

Mr. Fort.  Will the gentleman allow me ?

Mr. Goode.  Yes, sir.

Mr. Fort [Greenbury Lafayette Fort (1825-1883), Illinois R.; studied law, admitted to the bar].  As a republican I must here distinctly state that no caucus ever was held on that measure, and that it was not originated in a republican caucus.

Mr. Goode [John Goode (1829-1909) Virginia, D; studied law, admitted to the bar].  Then, Mr. Speaker, I have been entirely misinformed.  I have always understood, and never heard it disputed until now, this measure was agreed upon in a senatorial caucus of the republican party.

Mr. Fort.  It may have been in the Senate, but not so far as the House is concerned.

Mr. Goode.  I repeat, it was agreed upon in a senatorial caucus of the republican party.  So much for that.  But now, Mr. Speaker, I say, notwithstanding it had its origin (I accept the amendment) in a senatorial caucus of the republican party, we find in a recent convention of that party, held in Cincinnati, it has been utterly repudiated.  So far from the committee on resolutions indorsing this proposition, we find them making no allusion to it whatever, and content themselves with a few vague, indefinite propositions as to the duty of resumption at the earliest practicable moment.  It will be found by reference to the proceedings of that convention that this resolution offered as a substitute for the fourth resolution of the committee was voted down by a large majority:

Resolved, That it is the duty of the Congress to provide measures for carrying out the provisions of what is termed the resumption act of Congress, to the end that resumption of specie payments at the time fixed by said act cannot be further delayed.

I say that proposition, sir, offered as a substitute for the fourth resolution of the committee, was voted down by a large majority, and General Hawley, of Connecticut, chairman of the committee, declared in a speech made by him to that convention that he would be unwilling to go before the people in the pending campaign as the advocate of this bill known as the resumption law.

Now I desire to know, if it has been publicly repudiated by the party which brought it into existence, if it has been contemptuously ignored in the house of its friends, if in addition to this it has been denounced by the democratic party in Saint Louis as an obstruction and hinderance to resumption, I want to know why, if there is none so poor to do it reverence, it is there should be any hesitation on the part of this House as to its repeal ?

Mr. Speaker, as was said by my colleague on the committee, what is it as long as it remains on the statute-book but a standing menace to all the business interests of the country ?  Ever since it has been in operation we find the process of contraction has been going on.  It was in proof before our committee, the Committee on Banking and Currency, that since this law went into operation more than $50,000,000 had been withdrawn from circulation;  that two hundred national banks had gone into liquidation, and that twice two hundred were preparing to follow suit.  What has been the result ?  Why, Mr. Speaker, wherever you look, in whatever direction you turn your eye, you find business is stagnant, industry paralyzed, enterprise inactive, production suspended, and labor unemployed;  agriculture is suffering everywhere over this country and languishing for the want of necessary capital;  the workshop and the factory are closed, and thousands of mechanics dependent on their daily labor for their daily bread are found begging in the streets, not for bread, but for that work on which their bread depends.  Now, Mr. Speaker, I yield to no man on this floor or elsewhere in an earnest desire for a resumption of specie payments at the earliest practicable moment.  I want a sound, honest, stable currency, not dependent on the whims of parties or the caprices of politicians.  One of the greatest curses that could possibly be inflicted on any people is an irredeemable paper currency.  The national faith and the national honor are pledged, irrevocably pledged, to the redemption in coin of the legal-tender notes of the United States.  But, sir, in my humble judgment there can be no return of specie payments until there is a return of prosperity to the country.  This consummation so devoutly to be wished must come, if it come at all, as it will come inevitably, from the development of our material resources, from the revival of our industries, from the restoration of hope and of confidence to our people.

Sir, if there is anything to be learned from the lessons of experience and of history, they teach us that the shortest road to resumption lies in the correction of governmental abuses, in the reduction of governmental expenses, in the practice of honesty, simplicity, and economy in public as well as in private life.  I desire to quote here the expressive language of Mr. Tilden, which I had the pleasure of reading a little while ago:

There is no royal road for a government more than for an individual or a corporation.  What you want to do now is to cut down your expenses and live within your income.  I would give all the legerdemain of finance and financiering ---I would give the whole of it for the old homely maxim, "Live within your income."

And I say, Mr. Speaker, if we will continue this good work, if we will go forward in the line which has been marked out by this democratic House of Representatives, if we will continue the good work of strict economy and official retrenchment;  in a word, sir, if we will practice the old-fashioned virtues of our sires and live within our means, the day of resumption cannot be far hence.  Here is the royal road ---honesty, simplicity, economy, retrenchment.  Here lies the royal road not only to resumption of specie payments, but to the prosperity, the welfare, and the happiness of our people.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Townsend, of Pennsylvania, rose.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair understands that in accordance with the arrangement which has been made, the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. Kasson] now holds the floor.

Mr. Kasson.  I yield ten minutes to the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Townsend.]

Mr. Cox.  I expect to get the floor at the end of the hour to call the previous question.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair understands that that was agreed to by the common consent of the House.

Mr. Townsend, of Pennsylvania [Washington Townsend (1813-1894); West Chester Pennsylvania, R.; studied law, admitted to the bar].  It seems to me that the legislation proposed by the Committee on Banking and Currency is submitted to the House wrong end foremost.  The proper action of this House would be, first to appoint the commission which has been provided for in the resolution that comes from the Committee on Banking and Currency to ascertain the financial difficulties under which the country lies, and after that to apply the remedy.  But the Committee on Banking and Currency in its wisdom has thought proper to provide, first, that there shall be a repeal of the resumption law, and that, after that, there shall be a commission to inquire whether or not it ought to be repealed.  Thus they have reversed the proper order of things, for it would have been the part of wisdom to have endeavored to ascertain the causes of the financial difficulties and then to have applied the remedy.

But the action of that committee, composed as it is of a majority of the democratic party, shows to the world the utter incapacity of that party to manage the financial affairs of the country or even to suggest the means whereby the difficulties under which we suffer might be alleviated or might be cured.  That party has been in power here for eight months past.  It has had some twenty or thirty caucuses --I do not know how many-- on this financial question.  It has had all kinds of propositions offered to it by the democracy, and today it stands before the world acknowledging the fact that it is unable to propound a single proposition that will aid toward the resumption of specie payments.  That party complains that nothing has been done to carry out the law of 1875.  If it has not been done, upon whom does the fault lie ?  It has to-day its majority here in the House and its majority in the committee.  And yet it comes before the world and confesses that it is totally unable to grapple with and manage the financial question.  And after all its nominee for President of the United States, in his letter, which is laid upon our desks to-day, acknowledges the wisdom of the suggestions of the President of the United States and his Secretary of the Treasury, who, in the message of the President and in the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, propose a measure which, if it could be enacted into a law, would lead surely and in a short period to the resumption of specie payments.

In that message and report it was suggested that the surplus legal-tenders of the United States might readily be funded in United States bonds at a low rate of interest and long date, and that these bonds would absorb all the excess of the legal-tenders that might be floating around and unneeded in the business of the country, and that it would appreciate the legal-tender so far that in a very short time it would be nearly at par and require but a small amount of gold in order to effect a redemption.  Mr. Tilden in his letter acknowledged the wisdom of these suggestions, and after uttering some "glittering generalities" he recommended to his party that after they have procured the repeal of the resumption law they should adopt the policy which has been shadowed out by the President and the Secretary of the Treasury.  And this shows that there is no originality in the democratic party, either in the assembled wisdom of that party here or in their chosen candidate for the Presidency of the United States.  They accept republican ideas, and then put them forth as their own.

Now, with regard to the question of resumption of specie payments, we never know where to find the democratic party.  At one time it is in favor of resumption and at another time it is opposed to it.  In its platform in 1872, at the Baltimore convention, under the leadership of its great standard-bearer who said "the way to resumption is to resume," it declared that it was in favor of an early and speedy return to specie payments.  In the democratic platforms of 1874 in the State of Pennsylvania, and I think in some of the Western States, it was also in favor of returning early to specie payments;  but in 1875 the democratic politicians in the States of Ohio, Pennsylvania, and perhaps in Indiana, had changed their minds, had receded from the high position that they had taken, and acknowledged their inability to propose anything that would aid resumption and declared against it;  and in the platform which was gotten up by the democratic party at Saint Louis it was inconsistent and antagonistic in its utterances.  It was opposed to the changing standard of value such as is found in the legal-tender currency, and yet at the same time it was opposed to the act of Congress of 1875 that proposed to bring about a resumption of specie payments and do away with that changing standard which all the country knows is continually unsettling prices and making it impossible for any individual to tell what he will have to pay or to receive at the termination of his contracts.  Under the imperious demands of that irresponsible body demanding the repeal of the resumption clause the democratic party is acting to-day and urging the passage of this bill.

Now, Mr. Speaker, with this uncertain frame of mind of the democratic party, with a hard-money candidate at the head of its ticket and a soft-money candidate at the tail of it, what can we expect of that party if it is allowed to come into power and to endeavor to manage the financial interests of the country ? ---[Because during their 15-year rein the republican party did oh-so-well for the interest of the country !]  It says to the country that it is unable to solve this great problem and it does not know what can be done, and yet asks the people to intrust it with power to administer the financial affairs of the nation.  All the party can do or has done is to stand as an obstruction to the resumption of specie payments.  It is an obstruction party.  It has had no financial policy here, and admits its incapacity to originate any.  The republican party has pointed out the road to the resumption of specie payments in a funding of the surplus greenbacks in an easy and natural way, and if the democratic party thinks that the means we have provided are not sufficient whereby it shall be carried out, it becomes its duty, being here in power, to suggest some means whereby the desideratum can be reached.  Hitherto it has failed to make any propositions in that direction.  But now the democracy acknowledge their incapacity, they say in their platform which they adopted at Saint Louis, the greenback is a changing standard of values in the hands of the people and the non-payment of which is a disregard of the plighted faith of the nation and that we have failed for eleven years to do anything toward the resumption so devoutly to be wished for;  and yet they willfully forget that at the end of the war gold was at 150 and that to-day under republican management it is at 112, and that the republican party has drawn the legal-tenders that much nearer to a redemption in specie.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Willis.  Does the resumption act of January, 1875, in your judgment, contain adequate provisions to make good the promise of resumption in 1879 ?

Mr. Townsend, of Pennsylvania.  Yes, it does, if properly carried out;  but could be improved by additional legislation, such as I have indicated.

Mr. Kasson.  I ask the gentleman from New York to indicate to whom he next yields the floor ?

Mr. Cox.  I yield to the gentleman from Indiana [Mr. Haymond] for ten minutes.

Mr. Haymond.  Mr. Speaker, I cannot in the few minutes allotted to me in this discussion attempt an elaborate argument in favor of the repeal of the resumption law.  I gave my views to the House on this question in the early part of the session at considerable length, and I can but reiterate the opinions then expressed, believing they are just as applicable to the question to-day as they were then.  I represent a constituency heartily opposed to the policy of the present resumption act, and I would place myself in direct antagonism to their wish if I should not cast my vote for this bill.  There seems to be a wide difference of opinion between the people of different sections of the country on this subject;  one section believing it is destructive to their interests, while another clings to it as the forlorn hope of resumption and a step in the direction of permanent prosperity.  It is a remarkable fact that while these antagonistic views prevail and much undue sensitiveness exists, there is not to be found in either section of the country any well-informed financier who regards the resumption of specie payments possible under the provisions of this act at the time specified.  The act is regarded everywhere as mere brutem fulmen;  yet the opposition to its repeal is as strong and determined as if the act were practicable of execution and the embodiment of all that was essential to the solution of our financial difficulties.

In the West the act is regarded with serious apprehensions as the cause, or one of the chief causes, of the present financial distress prevailing through the country;  and whether this opinion is correct or not, the repeal of the resumption clause will be hailed with joy by millions of people who are now looking to Congress for some measure of relief.  Those demanding the repeal of the resumption law are sometimes derisively called inflationists, sometimes repudiators of our national obligations.  This is not only unjust, but a base slander.  Not one in ten of the industrious, intelligent, and honest men of the West who ask this small favor of Congress is in any sense of the word an inflationist.  On the contrary, I believe that a large majority of the people of all the Western States would oppose no obstacle to the resumption of specie payments if assured that it can be brought about by some rational and practicable method that will act equally and justly to all classes and all sections and will not spread ruin and consternation over the vital interests of the country.  I believe such legislation would be acceptable to the great mass of the people, would be a God-sent in this hour of confusion and trouble;  but if we cannot at this session agree upon any sensible legislation, let us not hesitate to undo what is now an acknowledged impracticability, a failure, and a terror to the public mind.  To strike out this resumption-date clause from the act of January 14, 1875, if it will do no other good, will at least secure tranquility, inspire hope, and give the people courage to bear their burdens patiently through this gloomy period of financial distress.

The present resumption law stands as an impediment to resumption, and the sooner it is removed out of the way the better.  It has remained upon the statute-books for a year and a half, and yet not a single step has been taken to execute its provisions or provide for the general resumption of specie payments.  Indeed it is not believed by any one that any attempt will be made, even if the act remains unrepealed, to execute its impracticable provisions.  If this conceded opinion is correct, why should the law be so tenaciously adhered to or so strenuously defended ?  I am utterly unable to understand how gentlemen who profess to be in favor of resumption cling to this abortive scheme as if it were the palladium of their hopes, and at the same time declare that it is a sham and a delusion.  It is folly to dispute over this plan of resumption that contains no practical provisions for resumption.

The bill before the House repealing the resumption-date clause, though it strikes out but a single sentence, effectually despoils and destroys all dangerous provisions of the resumption act.  If this is stricken out there will be but little left in the act of an objectionable nature.  The provisions of the first section of the law substituting subsidiary silver coin for the fractional paper currency having been carried into effect, the removal of the resumption-date clause from the third section will leave no powers to be executed in the act except to redeem the legal-tender notes to the amount of 80 per cent. of the national-bank currency that may be hereafter issued.  This amount can in no contingency be greater than the outstanding legal-tender notes in excess of $300,000,000, or altogether $69,679,228.  The rapidity of this redemption will depend entirely upon the issue of circulating notes to national banks.  If the banking capital of the country is rapidly increased, if there is an increased demand for more banking currency, then the legal-tender notes will be reduced and redeemed pari passu, according to the 80-per-cent. clause.  If, on the other hand, the demand for more banking currency be small, the redemption of the legal-tender notes will necessarily proceed slowly.

The probabilities are strong that it will require several years under this process to redeem the legal-tender notes in excess of $300,000,000.  This may be accomplished without the sale of any bonds by using surplus Treasury notes or selling gold to purchase the requisite amount of said legal-tender notes to be redeemed as occasion would require.  The Secretary of the Treasury is only authorized to sell or dispose of bonds for the redemption authorized by this act.  He cannot sell or dispose of them for any other purpose;  and when the resumption clause, as contained in the bill before the House, is stricken out of the resumption act, there will be no redemption authorized except that specified in the third section, namely, the redemption of the legal-tender notes to the amount of 80 per cent. of the sum of national-bank notes so issued to banking associations.  It is plain, then, if there should be no more national-bank notes issued, that there would be no further redemption of the legal-tender notes.  If this construction of the law is correct, the striking out of the resumption clause will amount practically to the same thing as an unconditional repeal of the entire act, except the provisions relating to banking and free coinage.

The repeal of the resumption act will leave the field clear and open for the devisement of some rational and practicable method for the adjustment of our financial difficulties.  It is much easier and better to institute a measure de novo than to attempt to patch up and remodel an abortive and mischievous plan.  The importance of an early settlement of the financial question upon some safe and satisfactory basis is now apparent.  The present resumption law is the most objectionable as well as the most difficult method of execution that could be possibly devised, and should be abandoned at once as worse than useless.

Mr. Eames.  Mr. Speaker, it is not my purpose at this late day of the session to attempt to discuss the question of finance to any considerable extent.  It has been my duty as a member of the Committee on Banking and Currency to give some thought during the course of the session to this difficult and delicate question, and I have formed in my own mind a definite and certain conclusion as to what would be the best policy to be pursued in order to put the Government of the United States in a position to redeem its pledge for the redemption of the legal-tender notes in coin.

We are, sir, in the ninth month of the first session of the Forty-fourth Congress, and during the entire session the Committee on Banking and Currency have had many propositions submitted for their consideration, to all of which the committee gave very careful, calm, and considerate deliberation;  but so many different views were entertained on the question that it was impossible, until within the last twenty-four hours, for a majority of the committee to come to a conclusion in relation to it, or make any definite and distinct recommendation to the House.

The bill reported to-day by the chairman of the committee as the result of the deliberation of the Committee on Banking and Currency during the past nine months to my mind is a bill that is ill-advised, unwise, and one which ought not to receive the approval of this House.  The policy of the republican party in the past years has been to take steps in the direction of the resumption of specie payments.  It was so in the act of 1869 when the pledge was given to redeem in coin the legal-tender notes as soon as it was practicable.  The policy was in the same direction under the acts of June 20, 1874, and the act of January 14, 1875, which provided for the retirement of the fractional currency by the issue of subsidiary silver coin, and fixed the 1st of January, 1879, as the day upon which the Government would pay its outstanding legal-tender notes in coin, and the policy of the republican party has since been steadily in the direction of resuming specie payments.

It has been said in this debate that nothing has been done or can be done to carry out the expressed purpose of resumption under the provisions of the act of 1875.  I beg leave to differ entirely from any statement of that kind, whether made by a member of the Committee on Banking and Currency or any other member of this House.  I believe if the act of January, 1875, remains as it now is, there is more than one mode by means of which every legal-tender note outstanding on the 1st day of January, 1879, may be appreciated to par in coin and made equal to coin in its purchasing power.

One mode has been suggested upon this floor to-day by the gentleman from Pennsylvania, [Mr. Townsend,] and I think a careful consideration of his proposition will lead any reflecting and intelligent mind to the conclusion to which he has come, that the policy should be as directed in the act of January 14, 1875, to purchase all the outstanding legal-tender notes not needed for the purposes of business or trade.  If that course should be taken by the purchase of these notes with bonds running for a long period of years and at a low rate of interest, the result would be that before we reach the time fixed for resumption every outstanding legal-tender note would be appreciated to par in coin.

We know that there is now outstanding about $370,000,000 of legal-tender notes and something like 310,000,000 of national-bank notes;  the two together making the currency, which is used as a medium of exchange, something like $700,000,000.  Now if whatever of this currency is not needed for the legitimate purposes of trade shall on or before the 1st day of January, 1879, be funded in bonds at a low rate of interest, the outstanding legal notes required for any legitimate purpose of business, as a medium of exchange in connection with the national-bank notes, on the 1st day of January, 1879, would be appreciated to par in coin and would continue equal in purchasing power to coin so long as required for the purposes of trade.  I venture to say that $70,000,000 of the outstanding legal-tenders would not be presented to the Treasury of the United States for redemption between this and that time, for every dollar would be kept in circulation if needed for purposes of business and trade.

I will state one other proposition, which has been presented and upon which action has been pressed, one to which I have given my own attention more particularly than to either of the others, and the one which in the present sensitive condition of the finances of the country, it seems to me, without creating any disturbance in our business relations, without contracting or inflating the present volume of the currency, will bring not only the legal-tender notes but at the same time the national-bank notes to par in coin.  It is a proposition for and a preliminary step in the direction of resuming specie payments.  It does not propose to take any step backward.  We all must agree that if we are ever to resume specie payments some time must be fixed for that purpose.

The time has already been named by the act of January 14, 1875.  That act was a notice of four years to the trade and commerce of the country of the intention of the Government to resume specie payment.  It has been acted upon from that time to this, and every contract that has been made since that time, has been made in view of the provisions of that act.  If the time named for resumption should now be repealed, its repeal will not only be injurious to our credit at home but would impair our credit abroad, and prevent us from being able hereafter to fund our debt at a low rate of interest.

The proposition which I make in my judgment is feasible, and I do not hesitate to hold myself solely responsible for it, so far as the Committee on Banking and Currency is concerned, for I believe I stand alone in that committee in favor of the proposition.  It is that from this time to the 1st day of January, 1879, the Government shall reserve of the gold received from imports 6 per cent. annually of the amount of its outstanding legal-tenders for the purpose of being able to resume specie payments on the 1st day of January, 1879.  With this reservation of coin I think at that time the Treasury of the United States would be in a condition to redeem every dollar of legal-tender notes that would be presented for payment or redemption.  That is a proposition which I think is entirely feasible and one that can be carried out without disturbing the financial relations of the country and without appreciating the value of gold;  and it may be done, as I said before, without changing the medium of exchange which now exists and which consists of legal-tender notes and national-bank notes.

Six per cent. upon the outstanding legal-tender notes annually reserved in gold would give each year the amount of $22,200,000;  and at the time named, the 1st day of January, 1879, there would be a reserve in coin in the Treasury of the United States of about $55,500,000.  That amount, with the surplus which has constantly been held there over and above the gold obligations of the Government, the interest on the public debt and the sinking fund, would swell the entire amount to something like $70,000,000.

Now I venture to say, from the experience of past years in banking in this country and in other countries, if there was $70,000,000 in gold in the Treasury of the United States, with $370,000,000 of legal-tender notes outstanding, $300,000,000 of which, with the national-bank notes, are required for the legitimate purposes of business, that the $70,000,000 in gold would be sufficient to pay every legal-tender note that would be presented for redemption.  It is to be remembered, in considering the question of the amount of specie required, that the legal-tenders and national-bank notes are scattered all over the country, that they are a more convenient medium of exchange in the transaction of business than coin, either silver or gold, and as I said before only that which is not required for the purposes of business and trade would be presented for redemption;  and I believe if this amount of money were reserved, then at the time now named for resumption, every legal-tender would be appreciated in purchasing value to par in coin. ---[which coin ? gold alone ? or silver, too ?]

There is another fact which I desire to state in this connection;  for it is said very plainly and boldly on this floor that no feasible proposition has been made for carrying resumption into effect at the date fixed;  it has been asserted that everybody agrees in the absolute necessity of the repeal now proposed, because it is impossible by any plan that may be suggested to put the Government in such a position as to be able to pay in the money of the Constitution such of its notes as may be presented.  Now, sir, when the State banks were in existence, as all of us know who were acquainted with their operations, the amount of their circulation and deposits as compared with the coin in their vaults was very small indeed.  We all know another fact, that notwithstanding the small quantity of their coin as compared with the amount of their circulation and deposits, yet during nearly the whole of the period from 1851 to 1863, although they occasionally suspended specie payments, their notes were equal to coin in purchasing value.  It appears from the reports that have been made from the Finance Department of this Government that in the year 1863 there were about fourteen hundred or fifteen hundred of these State banks;  that their aggregate resources were something like $1,100,000,000 and their liabilities about the same amount;  that the circulation and deposits of the State banks in 1863 were about $600,000,000, and the amount of coin in the vaults of all of them at that time about $100,000,000.  In other words, their coin was but as one dollar to six, or one dollar to seven, when compared with their circulation, deposits, and all other liabilities except capital stock.

If one dollar in coin to six in State-bank notes is sufficient to keep the circulation of State banks at par in coin it is reasonable to suppose that the same amount of coin in proportion to the outstanding legal-tenders would also keep them at par with coin.  And certainly there can be no difficulty in reserving in coin from the duties on imports the amount required by this proposition, for the amount paid of the public debt during the last fiscal year was nearly $30,000,000.

Another proposition which has been made and urged, and which will accomplish the same end, is the purchase at stated times in limited amounts of such part of the legal-tenders as are not required for the purposes of business.

No, Mr. Speaker, the difficulty in resuming specie payments on the 1st of January, 1879, is not because there are no feasible plans for that purpose.  The real difficulty is the want of a disposition to take some preparatory step which is required so as to be ready for resumption at the time named in the act of January 14, 1875.  If there was a will in this direction it would be easy to find a plan in by which to accomplish the purpose.

But if, for political effect in the coming contest for political power, no such plan shall be adopted at this session of Congress, I hope no bill will be approved which repeals the time now named for resumption.  I repeat that such a step would be a step in the wrong direction.  It would render uncertain any business transactions, and make the time indefinite, when, if ever, the Government would redeem the legal-tenders in lawful money.

Mr. Cox.  I now yield five minutes to my colleague, [Mr. Hewitt, of New York.]

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  Mr. Speaker, I am under very great obligations to my colleague, the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, for his courtesy in yielding me this time, because I find myself, as he knows, unable to agree with the report of the committee.  I am one of those who believe that the resumption act of January 14, 1875, was one of the weakest, crudest, and most unscientific pieces of legislation intended to effect a financial reform that ever passed this House, and I think I may say that the act has received the condemnation of every political economist in this country and abroad who has undertaken to consider whether it could be carried into practical effect or not.  But if there were any doubt upon that subject the confession of the President of the United States and the report of the Secretary of the Treasury at the beginning of this session make the matter entirely plain to us and to the country.

When the act was passed there was in the Treasury a considerable accumulation of gold.  There was nearly or quite $70,000,000 available for resumption;  and if that act had been intended to be an effective piece of legislation the Administration would never have allowed that stock of coin to melt away so that it would be impossible at any subsequent day to resume without replacing it.

The party represented on the other side of this House have from the very outset ---in 1869, in 1874, and in 1875--- made pledges and declarations, not one of which have they ever attempted to fulfill;  and I charge upon them and upon the administration (with the single exception of the late Secretary of the Treasury) that no substantial and honest effort has been made to resume specie payments.  But they did one thing:  they made the declaration to the world that we would resume specie payments on the 1st of January, 1879, and they committed the honor of this country to that declaration.  That honor they have had in keeping;  and they have not kept it well.  It is reserved in my judgment for the democratic party to fulfill that pledge;  and they will fulfill it, if time and opportunity be given to them, and if it be possible to comply with this ill-advised declaration which they have made to the world, a declaration which should never have been made until, by suitable measures of preparation, it was evident the promise could be kept.

[Here the hammer fell.]

The Speaker pro tempore.  The time of the gentleman from New York has expired.

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  I am very sorry, for I had not arrived at the point I desired to make.

Mr. Cox.  I hope there will be no objection to my colleague having five minutes of my time.

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  I really do not want to trespass on the time of my colleague because he has already been very generous in giving to me the time I have occupied.

Mr. Cox.  I give my colleague five minutes out of my time.

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  I will occupy but one moment.  I say that the party in power made a pledge, and that pledge we ought to try to redeem.  If I am asked whether I think it practicable to redeem it on the 1st of January, 1879, in the present condition of the country, I answer frankly, "no."  But I want to deal with this matter with wisdom and statesmanship;  and there is but one way to do this.  This question should be dealt with as it was treated in England during the long suspension there when they fixed three or four dates successively, trying each time to accomplish the object, and then confessing their inability, putting themselves upon the indulgence of the world for their good motives and their honest intentions.  We have no right to repeal the pledge thus given to the world until it becomes apparent by the careful investigation of a competent authority that it is not in our power to fulfill this solemn engagement.  And then we should as solemnly renew the promise and make proper preparations for its fulfillment.

I say, then, there is but one way to deal with this question.  It is to appoint a commission to take the whole subject into consideration --a commission upon which we can have men embodying the soundest financial wisdom of the country.  Let them study this question in the light of the largest experience;  let them make a report based upon the fullest consideration of every interest involved in it and the possibilities of the future;  and upon such a report this House can take intelligent action.  And it is for that purpose, Mr. Speaker, that I have trespassed upon the indulgence of my colleague, in order that I might offer a substitute for this bill, to which he does not agree, and in order that I might arrive at what I believe to be a substantial and practicable solution of this question.  With the indulgence of the House, I ask that my substitute may now be read.

Mr. Cox.  I have no objection to having it read, nor would I object to the proposition itself, but I am not authorized by the committee to accept it as an amendment.  I am not unwilling that it shall be adopted after this bill shall pass, but I think we will get substantially the effect of that measure in the bill that follows.

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  I ask my proposition be read.

The Clerk read as follows:

A bill to provide for a commission to consider the resumption of specie payments.

Be it enacted, &c., That a commission is hereby authorized and constituted, to consist of three Senators, to be appointed by the Senate, three members of the House of Representatives, to be appointed by the Speaker, and three experts, to be selected by and associated with them, with authority to determine the time and place of meeting, and to take evidence;  whose duty it shall be to consider what measures are necessary and practicable in order to bring about the resumption of specie payments at the earliest possible time consistent with a due regard to the interests of the country, and to report a bill embodying the results of their investigations on or before the 15th day of December, A.D. 1876.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair understands that paper has been read for information.

Mr. Cox.  I yield now for five minutes to the gentleman from Michigan, [Mr. Hubbell.]

Mr. Hubbell.  Mr. Speaker, it is perhaps one of the greatest drawbacks to the final settlement of the financial problem that it must of necessity be in some measure a political question, and that being so, financial quacks can continually find full scope for their energies, which have their effect on the body of the people who in turn each have a remedy for both real and fancied financial ills.

I am quite certain it is the wish of all classes that the value of our legal-tender, whose issue was made necessary by the great struggle for the preservation of the Union, should never be less than it is today, but, on the contrary, that it should gradually be appreciated to par with coin.  But how to do this without unnecessary shock to the business interests of the country has been and is now the great problem.  On the one hand it has been thought that the proper way was to fix a day certain when this should take place, while on the other it has been contended that it can only be safely and permanently brought about when the conditions, many of which are unknown quantities, are reached.

For one, sir, I have always contended that it was idle to arbitrarily fix a day in advance when we should commence to resume.  And I regard that part of the act of 1875 which fixes the time for resumption as a menace to the business of the country, and as rendering to some extent nugatory the free-banking clauses of that act.  And I regard its retention on the statute-book as mere sentiment and of no practical benefit whatever.  The fact that the repeal is now brought forward as a party measure after "Samuel has been heard from, and everything forgiven," does not influence my vote.  I shall most cheerfully vote for this measure, because I believe it to be a wise one, correcting a grave mistake, and in some measure relieving the labor and industries of the country.

Now, Mr. Speaker, I was right glad this morning to hear the gentleman from Virginia [Mr. Goode] inform this House that his party had discovered the royal road to prosperity and to resumption.  His road is honesty, retrenchment, economy, reform.  I say again that I am glad his party have discovered it.  I want to tell him and his party that the republican party have been traveling that road for the past sixteen years, traveling slowly, but surely;  and the fact that the democratic party has so lately discovered it may account for the zeal which has been manifested in that direction this winter.  It is a fact that new converts are always zealous, and zealous people are ever apt to make mistakes;  but I congratulate the democracy upon the fact that they have finally discovered the road.  This is a sudden conversion, and the danger of backsliding is so great that I advise my democratic friends to gather together each morning and each evening and adopt as their centennial song the penitential hymn of Dr. Watts, of which I give for their benefit the following stanza:

This is the way I long have sought,
And mourned because I found it not;
My grief and burden long has been,
Because I was not free from sin.
[Laughter and applause.]

The Speaker pro tempore.  The time of the gentleman from New York has expired.

Mr. Cox.  I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Indiana, [Mr. Holman.]

Mr. Holman.  The gentleman from New York asks the question:  Why repeal the resumption act ?  My answer would be that the carrying of that act into effect is absolutely impossible, because while vastly promoting the advantages and interests of the centralized wealth of this country and its vested capital, it is oppressing labor and bringing the wolf to the door of every laborer's household in this country;  because it has prostrated every productive enterprise, and is a menace against every industry which employs the labor of the people of the United States, it is simply impossible.  Resumption of specie payments is impossible unless you can reduce the volume of your paper money to a sum substantially equal to the amount of your coin.  That proposition cannot be called in question in the light of the learning which the generations before us have furnished upon this question of finance.

The passage of the act of 1869, which partially demonetized a large portion of the money in which payment of a portion of the public debt might have been made, and the passage of the act of 1873, by still further diminishing the money available for meeting the public debt of the country and the engagements of its people ---these acts have enormously enlarged your public debt and have induced the holding of the bonds of this Government by foreign nations, render early resumption absolutely impossible.  I am not surprised that a portion of this Union should demand the prompt and inexorable enforcement of this law, no matter what may be the perils to this country.  But on the present basis of taxation, Federal and local, it is impossible without the general prostration of the industries of the country that specie payments shall be resumed.  With our taxation, Federal and local, reaching seven hundred and thirty millions a year, it is practically impossible to reduce the volume of the currency and to maintain the honor of the nation and the obligations of the State and local governments.

The highway, as has been very-justly stated, to specie resumption is to reduce the burdens which rest upon the people of this country;  especially the burden of Federal taxation.  And this Congress will have done more toward resumption in reducing the burden of taxation to the extent of $30,000,000, if it shall reach no further during the present session of Congress, than all the laws you can enact.  Economy in the Government, local as well as Federal, is the first and most important step toward the resumption of specie payments.

But that fatal policy, the holding out of motives by our financial policy for holding our debt abroad, has rendered this resumption impossible.  France is no parallel.  Her debt is due to her own citizens.  The money that passes from her treasury to pay the interest on her bonds is not withdrawn from the country since she paid the enormous fine to the German people.  Its payment is no reduction of the agencies by which the industries of the people are promoted.  The same is true of all other nations.  Ours alone is indebted to the great powers of Europe --England, Switzerland, France, Germany.  We are the debtor nation, the West is greatly indebted to the East, and this measure of resumption would add not less than $150,000,000, to the indebtedness of the debtor class of this country.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. O'Brien.  Mr. Speaker, at the time the act of 1875 became a law I was absent from the House on an investigation, ordered by the House, in Mississippi.  Had I been here at the time I would have denounced that law, not only as a party necessity, so advocated by the republican party, but as a sham, a delusion, and a fraud.  I can only characterize it as one with all the other contemporary acts of that party which has misruled the nation during the past eight years.

In view of the waste, extravagance, and corruption of the present Administration in all its departments, that act can only be regarded as deceptive of the true interests of the people;  in fact, it was really intended to be a political make-shift instead of a statute passed in the true interests of the country.

But, Mr. Speaker, I believe in the propriety of viewing the acts of our political opponents, not as may have been intended by them, but in that light which may be productive of the most advantage.  We have a notable example in the action of yesterday.  The gentleman from Maine [Mr. Blaine] lately a member of this House has offered a joint resolution with an object to influence party animosities and introduce agitation on questions pertaining to religion as affected by politics, and the Judiciary Committee adopted his resolve with an amendment and introduced it as a democratic panacea for apprehended evils --they extracted good from evil-- no matter what opinion we may have in regard to the policy or principle of that action on the example quoted.

In regard to this resumption law let us do likewise.  Let us in the time that will be allowed to the democratic administration that is incoming in March next, as all our acts on this question are predicated on that belief and that desire --let us in the two years that will be given to us between .March, 1877, and January, 1879, show to the people of this country that we can renew to them and make good the plighted but broken faith of the republican party.  They gave us a sham and a delusion.  They gave us a promise without one single act or word of preparation in order to carry out that promise and make it good.  They, instead of offering the people of the country what they desired, a well-defined system of finance which would bring about resumption of specie payments, gave them but a miserable promise of renewal at a certain date.

We ought to compel them as far as we can to keep faith with the people.  We have inaugurated economy and retrenchment;  let us also inaugurate that great principle which is allied to and which is but another name for the leader whom we have placed at the head of our presidential ticket.  Let us, in the language of Governor Tilden and in the language of the Saint Louis platform, substitute some well-defined plan for a return to specie payments instead of a barren figment of a date.  Sir, my power shall be used as far as it goes in sustaining such a report from the Committee on Banking and Currency.

But what do they give us now ?

Mr. Fort.  Will the gentleman give us the democratic plan for a return to specie payments ?

Mr. O'Brien.  I will answer the gentleman's question.  The platform of the democratic party and the letter of acceptance of the democratic candidate for the Presidency set forth this fact, that there can be no resumption without date or with date unless the democratic administration which is to come into power reverses the action of the past administration, unless it inaugurates reform and retrenchment and economy;  unless, instead of corruptly spending the people's money and dissipating the revenues of the Government, you make purity, integrity, and economy the principles of official action.

That you have failed to do, and we promise to do it.  I adhere to and sustain at the same time the principles of my party.  I take from my enemies that which is good.  I adhere to the resumption act of 1875, and if I should have a voice in the next Congress, as it is almost now too late to do anything upon this question this session, I would advocate those measures which would bring the country to that condition of prosperity which would enable the Government without injury to the business interests of the country to stand by the law of 1875, and to pay coin for every dollar of legal-tender now in circulation.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Kasson.  I now yield two minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, (Mr. Cannon.)

Mr. Cannon, of Illinois [Joseph Gurney Cannon (1836-1926), Illinois, R.; studied law, admitted to the bar].  Mr. Speaker, I wish I had an hour, but I thank the gentleman for even a little time.  At last this bill is reported.  Eight months have elapsed, and the committee in the last days of the session report.  I am for the bill, but it does not go far enough.

Mr. Speaker, under the organization of the House and its rules the Committee on Mines and Mining have reported a bill to provide for the coinage of the silver dollar and make it a legal tender for all debts, public and private.  Now, then, under the rules that committee has an hour each day and no more;  just two dilatory motions, one to adjourn and the other to adjourn to a day certain, take the hour, and the bill makes no progress.  This has been followed day by day.  The gentleman from New York, [Mr. Hewitt, D.] an influential member of this House, chairman of the national democratic central committee, and Tilden's right-bower, leads off in this filibustering, with the help of the gentleman from Maryland [O'Brian, D.] and the gentleman from Iowa [Kasson, R.].  Now the present bill under the rules is not in the morning hour and may be considered and amended from day to day by a majority and passed with or without amendment, and no point of order lies against the bill, nor is its consideration limited by time;  and I want to say to the gentleman from Missouri, [Mr. Bland, R.] who has charge of the silver bill, and to the House, that without a change of the rule this is the only parliamentary key by which the silver bill can be passed this session.  The gentleman from New York, [Mr. Cox, D.] having charge of the bill, refused to receive any amendment and moves the previous question.  Now, if the previous question is voted down, the bill is open to amendment, and I will offer what is known as the Kelley silver bill as an additional section to the bill.  It is as follows:

There shall be from time to time struck and coined, at the several mints of the United States, silver dollars of the weight of 412½ grains, as provided for in the act of January 18, 1837, upon which shall be the devices and legends provided by said act;  and that the said dollar shall be a legal tender in payment of all debts, public and private.

Now I want you gentlemen on the other side of the House to "fish or cut bait."  This is the chance and the only chance you will have under the rules this session by which a bill can be passed by a majority vote, making the silver dollar a legal tender for all debts, public and private.  Gentlemen of the other side, do something positive for once during this session.  The bill is all right so far as it goes, and I will vote for it as it is, for I am in favor of it, but would prefer to get my amendment in and I want to say that the remonetization of silver is of infinitely more importance, and unless you use the present parliamentary key to put it on as an amendment to this bill I can see no hope of its being passed this session.  Some gentleman says the silver bill can pass as a separate proposition.  The gentleman knows there is but one way to pass it this session as a separate proposition and that is for the majority of the House to restore the rules preventing filibustering, which you repealed at the first of this session.

Mr. Speaker, if the majority of the House honestly want to pass any bill or measure, it can always find a way to pass it.  If the rules prevent, a majority of the House made the rules and a majority can change them.  If the committees will not report, a majority of the House elected the Speaker who appoints committees, and the majority can elect another Speaker who will re-organize the committees so they will report.  But I do not believe you, the majority of the House, have the honesty of purpose or the courage to do this;  and for that reason I want you to allow me to offer the amendment which I have before read.  We have had lip-service enough from you;  let your action prove that you are for the silver bill by passing it when you have the chance, and allow us to help you.

Mr. Cox.  I now yield for five minutes to the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. McMahon.]

Mr. McMahon.  I have had but short notice, Mr. Speaker, that I should have an opportunity to speak upon this question, and if I had had more, modesty would have compelled me to be brief in any argument I might make.  I cannot in five minutes do more than give to this House the sentiments of the people whom I represent.  My own are well known.  And I may say that in speaking for my people I know no well-defined party line which compels me to speak for democrats in preference to republicans.  If I understand their sentiments, I speak the opinion of numerous republicans as well as democrats when I say that the resumption law, as it stands, is a menace, as it was a fraud in the beginning, and that its repeal is no repudiation, no violation of a pledge, but will be a great relief to the country.  The gentleman from New York [Chittenden] says this repeal will be repudiation.  Repudiation of what ?  To whom have we promised to pay this money ?  We hold it in our own pockets.  It is not in the pocket of our foreign creditors.  It is uur debt;  it answers our purposes as money;  it circulates as money.  And are the few, who hold the great bulk of it, to be encouraged in a scheme by which it may be suddenly made equivalent to gold to the great distress of the people ?  No.  There are but few men in this country who will not stand by a democratic Congress which undertakes to relieve the people of some of the embarrassments that surround them;  and let us have the courage to give the relief that is demanded.

If we must stand by this fraud, this snare, this delusion, this hinderance to resumption --I do not now remember the other names it has received in this debate by men who support it in order to preserve our good name and prevent ourselves from being called repudiationists-- then I must say that our previous character must have been very bad indeed.  I for one want no such certificate in regard to our position.  This bill does not do all that the western people desire;  it does not reach the entire evil.  But "half a loaf is better than no bread;"  and we must be content with that which we have an opportunity of getting when we cannot do better.  I hope to live to see the day, not as my friend from New York [the Chittenden] probably would say, when the greenbacks will be redeemed and retired --for we will never agree to that in the West-- but when the greenback, by economy and judicious legislation, will be made worth its face in gold.  But we do not want the greenback currency withdrawn.  It is convenient money, and if equalized with gold would be the best circulating medium the country has ever had.

It is time, I think, that the great democratic party, which has always claimed to be the ally and the friend of the people, which has always looked to the interest of the many in preference to that of the few, should now heed the suffering and the distress that is abroad in the country;  should look to the destruction of our manufacturing interests and the lack of employment;  should look to the reduction in value of our property and the ruin of our business.

Let us show that our hearts beat for the people;  that we are in favor of relieving them from their distresses and burdens;  and let us not seek hastily to redeem a fraudulent so-called pledge fastened upon the country.

Only desiring to put on record, in the short time allowed me, the feeling of my people upon this matter and earnestly hoping that this bill will pass, I now give way to those who are to follow me.

Mr. Kasson.  I now yield to my colleague [Mr. Wilson] for two or three minutes.

Mr. Wilson, of Iowa.  Mr. Speaker, currency has less to do with the depression of some of our industries than over-production in manufactures and over-speculation in stocks and real estate.  The prosperity of the country depends upon the creators of wealth and the surplus we can sell.  An examination of our exports will show that we sell the products of the farm and the mine principally, the products we sell abroad of the manufactory being inconsiderable.  We sell between five and six hundred million dollars' worth of exports in a year and buy as much of imports.  The merchants who handle these commodities require insurance against the fluctuations of gold that the consumer of foreign commodities must pay.  If we had a specie basis this insurance would be saved.

The farming interests of the West lose heavily by paying the transportation of their products to the seaboard.  This can be overcome in part by building up manufactures in the West;  but until we can have a stable currency capitalists hesitate to invest.  It is now provided by law that these evils shall cease January 1, 1879.  The cost would be the interest on sufficient gold and silver to redeem the Treasury note with and the loss to the creditor and creditor class a change of values to the extent of the difference between paper and specie, and this difference would also be added to the obligation of the debtor.

But the end of uncertainty in values, the inauguration of confidence and prosperity, would amply repay for the loss.  To adopt this bill repealing the time fixed is to put the subject in greater uncertainty when it is our duty to take steps to resume.  The annual loss of the unemployed labor and capital to the nation will be greater in the next two years than the cost of resumption.  What would be thought of a debtor who owed a note payable in two years who, fearing he could not meet his obligation, proposed to strike the date of payment from the note ?  This is meeting a national debt, a war debt.  Our people have never hesitated to meet their obligations when justice to their creditors was concerned;  they surely will not hesitate when the result will be for their own benefit.  I am confirmed in my suspicions that this bill is for party purposes when I see men who have opposed it heretofore racking their brains for reasons to excuse their votes.  We must resume some time, and uncertainty will be fearfully expensive till we do.

Mr. Kasson.  I now yield for three minutes to the gentleman from Maine, [Mr. Hale.]

Mr. Hale.  It is a pleasant thing to see this programme carried out.  One year ago the New York democracy, the puppet of Governor Tilden, resolved that it would take no step backward upon the question of the resumption of specie payments.  Six months after that there were signs of coquetting with the inflation democracy of the West, and the eastern democracy began to talk of never yielding to a repeal of the date of resumption unless something was put in its place that would bring about redemption.

Then the Saint Louis convention met;  and although to that convention the New York democracy went up like the tribe of Judah from the plain, it there met the inflation democracy, which had power enough to dictate the platform of the party and to select its candidate for Vice-President.  Therefore, when the convention adjourned, the only questions left to be considered in the programme were the letters of acceptance of the candidates for President and Vice-President, and the further question of what this democratic House should do in the last days of this session.

We now have, within the last forty-two hours the letters of acceptance of the democratic candidates for President and Vice-President and the proposed action of this democratic House of Representatives.  What is that proposed action ?  It is the repeal of the date of resumption, pure and simple.  There is connected with it no measure to put in the hands of the Secretary of the Treasury any power to prepare for resumption.

The flag is lowered.  No wonder that during the conferences between Governor Tilden and Governor Hendricks at Saratoga and at other places the Cincinnati Enquirer said:

Mr. Hendricks was talking to the eastern democrats when at Saratoga.  He was endeavoring to catch the eastern coon.  He wasn't there to harrow up the feelings of his eastern friends.  He is a soothing and complacent man.  But just get hold of Governor Hedricks on the plains of the West, and he will satisfy his greenback friends.  Mr. Hendricks is a sagacious, wise man.  He has learned the methods of Paul.

Truly Governor Hendricks not only tried to get but did get the "eastern coon."  We are confronted here with the proposition to lower the flag and repeal the date of resumption.  I contrast it, as a part of the programme made public in the last twenty-four hours, with the declaration of Governor Hayes two months before his nomination, when, being asked whether he would under any circumstances favor a repeal of the date fixed for resumption, he declared boldly and explicitly that under no circumstances would he consent to it unless it was accompanied with some measure that should make resumption speedy and effectual.  My friends on the other side have had an opportunity to put such a provision in this measure, but have declined to do so.  They have lowered the flag and have the power to keep it lowered.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Kasson.  I yield for a few moments to the gentleman from Ohio, [Mr. Rice.]

Mr. Rice.  Mr. Speaker, in this connection I wish to state that on the 24th day of July I had the honor to introduce a resolution, which was adopted by this House, requesting the Secretary of the Treasury to report within one week the exact amount of gold coin and bullion in the Treasury, with the amount of obligations outstanding payable in gold on that date.

In his reply to that resolution the honorable Secretary took occasion to add to the gold the amount of silver coin and bullion also in the Treasury, and to deduct from the entire sum the amount of gold obligations payable on demand;  thereby showing a much larger coin balance in the Treasury than actually existed for the payment of such debts.  Now, Mr. Speaker, I hold that that report is calculated to mislead the public mind in regard to the true condition of the Government;  in regard to its ability to meet its rapidly maturing obligations made payable by legislation in gold;  and I desire at this time to correct such an error, and submit the following figures for that purpose:

According to said report there was actually in the Treasury in gold on the 24th ultimo .... $52,657,546.43
Outstanding obligations payable in gold on demand. .... 43,780,021.30
Leaving a gold balance in the Treasury amounting to. .... 8,877,525.13
From which should be deducted for August interest, now past due .... 6,460,743.75
Thus making the total amount of gold in the Treasury at this time and available for the resumption of specie payments. .... 2,416,781.38

A sum much less than is frequently shipped out of the port of New York in one week, and less than ½ of 1 per cent. on the amount of legal-tender notes and national-bank currency which it is proposed to redeem in gold on the 1st day of January, 1879.

I submit these figures and remarks, Mr. Speaker, in order that the country may be informed on the questions referred to in my resolution, and also to let this House and the country know the exact amount of coin on hand with which to resume specie payment and how much preparation had been made in that direction, and what the prospect or the probable ability of the ·Secretary of the Treasury to comply with the provision of the resumption law of January 14, 1875, which declares for resumption on the 1st of January, 1879.

The gentleman from New York [Mr. Hewitt] states that at the time of the passage of the resumption act the amount of coin available for the purpose was about $70,000,000.  Now, by the above showing it will be seen that after liquidating the outstanding obligations payable in gold on demand, the Secretary of the Treasury has at this time in the Treasury available for the resumption of specie payment, according to the provisions of that law, but $2,416,781.38.  In the face the facts are not these figures appalling ?  Well may the gentleman say that the legislation which gave this resumption act to the country was immature, vicious, and unwise, and, in the language of the Saint Louis platform, is not the resumptionary clause "a hinderance and an obstruction to the return of specie payments ?"

Mr. Kasson.  I yield five minutes to the gentleman from Illinois, [Mr. Burchard.]

Mr. Burchard, of Illinois.  Mr. Speaker, the proposition before the House is more than a proposition to repeal the date fixed for resumption.  A vote for this measure will be a vote against resumption itself.  There never has been a resumption of specie payments after suspension without previously fixing the date, either by agreement among the banks or by law.  It was so in England, although the time was postponed.  It has been so in the history of our Government.  In 1814, when the United States Bank was chartered for the purpose of bringing the country back to resumption and when gold was at 20 per cent. premium, it was made a provision of the charter, that the bank when it commenced business should pay specie for its bills and to its depositors.  Within a year the nation returned to specie payments, and gold and paper were of equal value.

So, although in 1837, after the suspension of May 10, gold was at a premium of 10 per cent. within a year, in May, 1838, the banks agreed that they would resume.  Gradually the premium declined, and resumption was reached in accordance with that agreement.  Hence I believe it is wise to fix some date for resumption.  Prolong the time if necessary, or if, in the language of the Saint Louis platform, the resumption act is a hinderance to resumption, fix an earlier date;  but the repeal of the provision fixing a date without naming any time means no time for resumption.

It is said the country is in no condition to take measures for resumption.  Is that so ?  The great country is prosperous.  There may be idle men in the cities and clamorous beggars be found in the streets, and the impression may have arisen because of this and that, in some towns and villages mills and factories have stopped, and laborers are out of employment, that the country is impoverished and suffering.  But the great industries of the country are being carried on as formerly.  There were 20,000,000 more acres under the plow and nearly one million more men required to do the work upon farms in 1875 than in 1870.  The value of farm products was hundreds of millions of dollars greater.  There was more coal mined last year than in any previous year in our history.  Statistics which I have just received from the secretary of the American Iron and Steel Association show that more rolled iron was produced last year, more steel in every form, and more of every product of iron and steel and other metals, except pig-iron.  The great industries of the country are not prostrated.  The great mass of the quiet workers of the country are not and have not been idle or these material and incontrovertible evidences of their labor would not exist.

It is true that prices are depressed and that manufacturing and business enterprises consequently do not return the large gains formerly received, but all the wealth of previous years is here;  the production is not essentially diminished.  Why, then, is it not a good time to make preparation for resumption ?  Instead of undoing the legislation aiming to secure specie payment and turning back on the road, this Congress should supply the defects and omissions of existing law and devise measures that will accomplish the object with greater certainty.

How shall we commence ?  The matter is discussed in Mr. Tilden's letter;  but it seems to me that it is not sufficient to depend upon the Government to accumulate gold.  We have the machinery here through which and with which the necessary coin can be gradually, safely, and certainly accumulated.  In my judgment, it is not necessary to contract the currency as a preliminary step;  it is not necessary to reduce the amount of outstanding circulation in order to secure resumption.  Let the volume of currency take care of itself.  The maintenance of specie payments only requires that the national banks (which are able, perfectly able, to do it) should lay aside from year to year the coin interest that they receive from the Government and put it into their vaults as part of their reserve, allowing the currency now held there as reserve to be thrown into the channels of circulation.  In two years and a half by this means $50,000,000 will thus have been added to the present stock.  A late act has already provided for coining $50,000,000 of subsidiary silver.  Add these amounts to the $150,000,000 of gold in the country and we have $250,000,000.  Let the Treasury lay aside coin as a part of the sinking fund or on some other plan --I do not care what-- and by 1879 the Treasury will have strengthened itself with $80,000,000 additional coin, and then there will be $330,000,000 at least of coin in the country, and nearly half as much coin as the paper circulation.  That is as great a proportion of coin as we had at any time before the mines of California were opened.  It seems to me that this is a necessary step toward resumption, and it is a mockery and pretense to declare in favor of specie payment and then repeal the date fixed for resumption without providing any better substitute or wiser plan for attaining it.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Kasson.  Mr. Speaker, if there is any one greater cause of discouragement than any other to a gentleman in public life, it is the frequent instances which present themselves of legislative impatience and haste where there is great need of legislative deliberation.  No gentleman upon either side of the House, I apprehend, has been here many years without feeling again and again how slight are the rewards offered in our parliamentary system to those gentlemen who desire to devote themselves directly to the solid interests of the people whom they represent.  We go on from day to day, from week to week, with our legislation without any patient and thorough investigation into the real, substantial interests of the country.  But when a so-called political question is presented on this floor parties rally, numbers are aggregated, pressure is brought to bear, debate is cut off, and the party lash applied irrespective of what the great radical interests of the people require.

Sir, the question before the House is one of a class that demands the most serious thought and deliberation and inquiry into the great business interests of the country before we can with any just right say that the repeal of the day of resumption is demanded.  Sir, not one word of proof is presented to you by the Banking and Currency Committee;  not one particle of evidence is supplied by the gentlemen who have taken the floor which can be relied upon by a deliberative body, to show that you cannot give this great boon of sound money to the people by the 1st day of January, 1789.

Finding myself met here by political platforms, political candidates, political considerations, I feel how vain it is to address myself with probable good results to that judgment of the representatives of the people which seeks alone the public good.  Gentlemen say no preparation has been made for the resumption of specie payments.  Sir, since the financial panic of 1873 enormous preparation has been made.  Not by legislative efforts so much as by the voluntary efforts of the people themselves.  Economies have come into public, social, and business life throughout the country.  Expenses are reduced everywhere.  Hundreds of millions of debts have been discharged directly by payments, and other hundreds of millions have been discharged by the processes of the bankrupt courts.

More than that, sir;  in the last fiscal year, commencing on the 30th of June, the balance of trade --without estimating the balance of specie shipments-- the balance of trade shows $77,000,000 of gold value in favor of the United States.  And the good work is going on still, reducing imports of luxuries and increasing exports.  And in presence of the fact that this law of 1875 was passed nearly two years after the disaster came upon the country that brought the hard times, (the failure of the Northern Pacific Railroad,) to this law, passed in 1875, the politicians and the demagogues from one end of the country to the other are attributing the hard times of 1873 as the effect of proposed resumption !  The hard times came immediately from extravagant railroad enterprises, and ultimately from the extravagance induced by irredeemable and cheap paper money.  Mr. Speaker, the question has been abused by the politicians.  It is presented here to-day by the politicians.  As one gentleman has said, in the ninth month of the session a political platform brings it here --no, not even a political platform, but a political candidate for the Presidency pronounced in his letter, just published, for its repeal, and the bugle-call of party summons you to follow it and repeal a statute whose whole action has been beneficial to permanent American interests.

It is bringing us to the economies demanded and has brought us largely to them.  It has brought national, State, and municipal governments to economical practices.  It is bringing the balance of trade largely in our favor, amounting, including the specie shipments, to a balance of $130,000,000 in the last year, as shown by the official letter which I send to the reporter to be published as part of my remarks, verifying what I have said. The letter is as follows:

Treasury Department, Bureau of Statistics,
July 8, 1876.

Dear Sir: I transmit herewith, at your request, a statement showing the imports into and exports from the United States during the eleven months of the fiscal year ended May 31, with an estimate (from some of the ports) for June, and giving the following results:

Imports for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1876, $460,087,277;  for the same period in 1875, $533,005,436, showing a falling off of $72,918,159.

Exports of domestic products, (mixed values) ................... $591,677,554
Exports of foreign products ................................ 14,393,342
606,070,896.

For the fiscal year 1875, $559,237,638 domestic and $14,158,611 foreign, showing an increase in the total exports of $32,674,647.

It will be observed that the domestic exports above given are expressed in mixed currency;  reduced to gold, the amount is a little over $522,000,000 for domestic products, and the whole exports in gold value is $537,000,000, showing an increase in the total exports, gold value, of about $24,000,000 over those of the previous fiscal year, and about $77,000,000 over the imports of the present year.

The imports of specie in the last fiscal year amounted to $15,530,648 and the exports to $69,139,066, showing an excess of exports of $53,608,418.  By adding this amount to the excess of merchandise exported, namely, $77,000,000, the total excess of exports of merchandise and specie over imports during the year is about $130,000,000.

These figures are approximately accurate, and will probably be found to vary not more than $2,000,000 from the correct ones when the accounts for June shall have been received and compiled.

Very respectfully yours,
Edward Young,
Chief of Bureau.

Hon. J.A. Kasson, M.C., Washington.

Thus the work of preparation goes on.  One of the bankers before our committee, in answer to the suggestion of my honorable friend from New York, testified that the banks had made already large preparations, particularly his own, and said other banks in New York had done the same.  Your bank-vaults are crowded with a surplus of paper money, and you have not allowed this Government to provide for its redemption by funding and cancellation, even on the sole condition that the people themselves wish to surrender and cancel their paper money.  You have refused the right to the people, which the original act gave them, of funding the greenbacks, a right which gave them so much value under the funding act.  And you still refuse to return that right to them.  Not this side of the House, but the other has refused to do that.

Mr. Willis rose.

Mr. Kasson.  Excuse me now.  And we have proposed to reduce the expenses of the public debt further.  In the Ways and Means Committee has been pending for months a bill passed by the Senate enabling the Secretary of the Treasury to reduce our rate of interest from 6 to 4½ per cent., and that bill is not reported.  Another proposition has been to reduce it to 4 per cent.---

Mr. Morrison.  Will the gentleman allow me a moment ?

Mr. Kasson, (continuing.) --- by the extension of the time of maturity as an equivalent for the diminution of interest, and that is not reported to the House.

Mr. Morrison.  Does not the gentleman from Iowa know that the Treasury has at its disposal now three hundred millions of 4½ per cent. fifteen-year bonds, and seven hundred millions 4 per cent. thirty-year bonds undisposed of ?

Mr. Kasson.  Precisely;  and the Secretary's letter told the committee they could not be negotiated, as they needed some ten years added to the time when they matured as an equivalent for the reduction of the interest, and no report has been made to the House on the subject.  Ah, does it lie in the mouths of the opponents of specie resumption to say the fault rests with the republicans, and we cannot resume in 1879 with the measures they can yet submit for our action prior to that time ?

Sir, I care nothing for that identical day.  The 2d of January is as good as the 1st to me;  and the 25th of December prior to the 1st as good as the 1st of January.  There is no cabalistic effect in the 1st day of January.  But the significance, the dangerous significance --and no man knows it better than Governor Tilden-- of this proposition is that it leaves no port to sail to and no time at which your arrival shall be expected.

Mr. Garfield.  And no promise.

Mr. Kasson.  As that distinguished politician stated in his letter laid upon our desks this morning, "with a good pilot at the helm --S.J.T., to wit-- if you start on a voyage for Liverpool you are sure to arrive there."  But he is taking Liverpool out of the resumption act, and proposes to make a voyage only "for Cowes and a market." [Laughter.]

Mr. Speaker, his letter and the claims set up by his friends of being honestly devoted to the resumption of specie payments have yet to be canvassed by the people of the United States.  The platform is an evasion.  A large party in this country demands the entire repeal of the resumption act and want no resumption at all.  They are honest.  They believe in poor money, and they take the proper steps to arrive at it.  But when a gentleman believes in good money, which can be made good in only one way, then he is not justified in striking a blow at one of the most essential features of the resumption act without substituting an equivalent measure.

I have not time of course to cover the whole ground of this debate.  The bill which the committee have attacked in part contains several provisions for the resumption of specie payments besides that of which they propose the repeal.  And the other words of that act will remain, of course, standing unsupported by this other clause and emasculated of all vigor by this repeal, leaving us all afloat as far as the public confidence in future resumption is concerned.  The gentleman from New York, who I think has an honorable purpose in respect to the resumption of specie payments --I refer to Mr. Hewitt-- announces the fact that in the passage of that act the honor of the country was committed to its execution, but condemns what he calls the haste with which it was adopted.  Is it possible that that gentleman, admitting that the honor of the country has been constitutionally pledged, is himself willing to aid in striking this blow at that honor in the presence of the world ?  Can any man who believes that the country is bound to exhaust all honorable efforts to arrive at that result, can such a gentleman vote to abolish this clause in the act until all possible measures to give it effect have been tried and found wanting ?

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  I beg to remind the gentleman that that was the exact statement I made.

Mr. Kasson.  Am I to understand that the gentleman is opposed to this repeal ?

Mr. Hewitt, of New York.  Certainly.  I announced my position to-day, and moved a substitute.

Mr. Kasson.  Then I beg to apply my remarks to the other gentlemen who accept his premises but do not honorably accept his conclusions.

We stand, then, in the presence of a desirable object, for which a certain provision has been made by existing laws.  And in that condition of things, without avowing their hostility to the object of the law, gentlemen are here proposing to take away that part of the law which is vital to the rest and without which the remainder cannot be executed, and are doing it, to quote the platform on which they stand, because it is a "hinderance to resumption."  Now, sir, look for a moment at the political deceit of that proposition.  They say that a law which declares that resumption shall take effect by a certain time and does not say that it shall not come prior to that time is a hinderance to the result to be arrived at.  Is that consistent with your two arguments that no preparation has been made and that it is not possible to resume by the time named ?  If there is any significance in terms, this must be a hinderance, because without it you would arrive at resumption quicker.  Will you make this argument in Indiana ?  Will you say that you are going to resume specie payments before the 1st of January, 1879 ?  How will you use it on the stump in Indiana and in New York ?  Will you not, on the contrary, say in the West simply that Tilden is for the repeal of the resumption act and Hendricks is for the repeal of the resumption act ?  Will you not say in New York and the East that it means to arrive at resumption sooner than 1879 ?  And will not you tell the greenbackers of Indiana that they must come and help elect these candidates in order to defeat the resumption of specie payments ?  Sir, that clause of the platform struck me with more than opposition;  it struck me with a feeling, I hope I may be permitted to say, of disgust.  That the law should be said to be positively a hinderance to resumption when they do not suggest anything except its repeal to help resumption, that seems to me a positive and direct evasion of the responsibility under which that party stands to the country.  It is a two-faced declaration, worthy of the politician trained in the school of Martin Van Buren.

Mr. Tilden says in his "message," as some gentleman has called it, based as I suppose upon its length, that---

To amass the requisite quantities---

Alluding to an accumulation of coin for the purpose of resumption---

To amass the requisite quantities, by intercepting from the current flowing out of the country, and by acquiring from the stocks which exist abroad, without disturbing the equilibrium of foreign money markets, is a result to be easily worked out by practical knowledge and judgment.

Now, if this is a result to be easily worked out in this way, why have not his friends proposed a better plan than the republican administration has proposed.

Mr. Willis.  We will, when the responsibility devolves upon us.

Mr. Kasson.  Why have you not, when the responsibility is upon you in this House of Representatives, proposed a proper measure ?  Why has not a single measure for that purpose come from a committee of this House while under the control of the democratic party ?  Why have they not moved an amendment to this act in the Committee on Banking and Currency, providing for the accumulation of the requisite amounts ?

Mr. Willis.  Because there is a better means than that which is provided by the original act.

Mr. Kasson.  And why does not the honorable gentleman for whom they propose to vote suggest those easy and practical ways for arriving at that result ?  Why is it that the man who sees no obstacle, who wants no obstacle, and whose friends in this House have not the necessary knowledge --why is it that he does not supply the knowledge that will enable them before this session closes to introduce their measure ?  Certainly this side of the House will vote for it with great promptitude if it tends to the result we so much desire --to relieve the country of its uncertainty.

Mr. Speaker, I think the more you examine the position of this question, the more you will see that this is not a measure honestly designed for the benefit of the people, but is merely a party bridge across a political chasm.  Let this issue be distinctly and constantly drawn, that the party to whose principles I am permanently attached, persists in demanding good constitutional money for the laborers, the farmers, the producers of the United States, for all the people of the country, while the so-called party jumps at every form of poor money;  first at paper, because it is poorer than gold;  and then at silver, because it is more fluctuating, more depreciated than paper.

[Here the hammer fell.]

Mr. Cox.  The gentleman from Iowa when he charges this side of the House with recklessly jumping toward unconstitutional currency, and when he makes a political rather than a fiscal speech, ought to remember the eleven years of continued imbecility upon the other side.  During that period his side of the House had at times two-thirds majority.  His party also had the Senate and the President.  Yet how signally they have failed to bring back this country to the old constitutional standard of wages and prices.  It does not become a gentleman who is in part responsible for that action to taunt this side of the House with remissness.  He should read the democratic platform, which truly declares that---

Reform is necessary to establish a sound currency, restore the public credit, and maintain the national honor.

We denounce the failure for all these eleven years of peace to make good the promise of the legal-tender notes which are a changing standard of value in the hands of the people, and the non-payment of which is a disregard of the plighted faith of the nation.

We denounce the improvidence which in eleven years of peace, has taken from the people in Federal taxes thirteen times the whole amount of the legal-tender notes, and squandered four times their sum in useless expense without accumulating any reserve for their redemption.

We denounce the financial imbecility and immorality of that party which, during eleven years of peace, has made no advance toward resumption, no preparation for resumption, but, instead, has obstructed resumption by wasting our resources and exhausting all our surplus income, and, while annually professing to intend a speedy return to specie payments, has annually enacted fresh hinderances thereto.  As such a hinderance we denounce the resumption clause of the act of 1875, and demand its repeal.

We demand a judicious system of preparation by public economics, by official retrenchments, and by wise finance, which shall enable the nation soon to assure the whole world of its perfect ability and its perfect readiness to meet any of its promises at the call of the creditor entitled to payment.

That platform indicts your party for its improvidence, extravagance, and expenditures by which the resumption of specie payments has been a vain endeavor.  It indicts your party for eleven years of financial imbecility and immorality in making no preparation for resumption.

But I do not intend now and here to discuss mere political matters.  One startling fact should be heeded by this House before it votes upon this proposition.  It is, that if this resumption law is enforced, in two and a half years there will be a coercive resumption of $670,000,000 of circulating paper.  That includes bank and legal-tender notes.  They are now below par to the amount of 12 per cent.  To this the United States adds, by failing to provide a legislative relief and remedy, $80,000,000 of the purchasing power of that paper.  We would cruelly require the debtor to pay his debts in currency at 12 per cent. more than was contracted.  More than that;  if this resumption day is carried out we increase the burden of the debtor class to an enormous extent.  It is thought that we have six thousand millions of indebtedness.  This is now generally believed to be the amount existing in this country.  If this be correct, sir, it adds $730,000,000 by enforced resumption to the burdens of the debtor class.  For this you will be held responsible.

You try to make this a party question.  You made a party question of the resumption bill.  It was passed as such, except in so far as some honorable gentlemen on the other side to whom I have referred voted against the bill.  Senator Sherman himself said that the republican party needed "a policy," and therefore they passed the finance bill of January, 1875.  You drove that bill through here from party tendencies, motives, and aims.  But have you done anything to restore confidence, remove impediments to the revival of business, or facilitate the growth of prosperity ?  You would resume specie payments, but what worthy of the name have you to resume with ?  You have had the President and the Senate and the House of Representatives for most of the time and you have done nothing substantial.  You have not even followed the recommendation of your own Secretary of the Treasury in the points heretofore referred to.  You dare not follow his advice, when he says upon page 19 of his annual report:

The existing provision of law making United States notes legal tender for all debts both public and private, with certain exceptions relating to transactions with Government, is an artificial barrier to the use of gold and silver, tending not only to prevent the flow of gold toward this country, but promoting the shipment abroad of our own production of the precious metals.  For this reason Congress should abolish the legal-tender quality of the notes as to all contracts made and liabilities arising after a fixed day.  The 1st day of January, 1879, being already fixed by law as the time when the redemption of United States notes then outstanding shall begin, it would be proper and safe to provide that such notes shall not be legal tender for contracts made or liabilities incurred after the 1st day of January, 1877.  Such an act would not too suddenly change the value of the notes and would not affect injuriously either debtors or creditors, but would remove a present obstruction to the retention of our gold and silver production, and create a demand for the return of gold now abroad, thus promoting final resumption by preparing the country for it.

In furtherance of the purpose of the act of the last Congress to provide for the resumption of specie payments, the Secretary recommends that authority be given for funding legal-tender notes into bonds bearing a low rate of interest.

Why did you not help him abolish the legal-tender quality of the greenback ?  Why did you not fix the time for it which he suggests, to wit, January 1, 1879 ?  Why did you not help him in that regard as well as in funding the legal-tenders ?

You have voted down many motions and resolutions which have been made here in the last ten years.  Some of these I have offered, copying them from the executive messages.  Propositions made, both in the Committee on Banking and Currency and in the House, to resume, or inquire into the feasibility of resuming specie payments you have killed.  The record on that can be produced against you.  Hence we say again, eleven years of imbecility and immorality lie against you.

Hence we say that an impossible date fixed for resumption is a hinderance for which you are responsible.  We quote from Governor Tilden's message to show that a fixed date is not so important as legislation which allows business interests to succor us from paralysis.  Time, economy, and honesty will aid us to resumption.  When the time is ripe for it and the business interests of the country will admit of it, Congress can then fix upon the proper time, as did England under like circumstances.

Resumption is the great desideratum;  and no one has so happily expressed it as Governor Tilden in the letter of acceptance which I quote from:

The proper time for resumption is the time when wise preparations shall have ripened into a perfect ability to accomplish the object with a certainty and ease that will inspire confidence and encourage the reviving of business.  The earliest time in which such a result can be brought about is the best.  Even when the preparations shall have been matured, the exact date would have to be chosen with reference to the then existing state of trade and credit operations in our own country, the course of foreign commerce, and the condition of the exchanges with other nations.  The specific measures and the actual date are matters of detail, having reference to ever-changing conditions.  They belong to the domain of practical administrative statesmanship.  The captain of a steamer about starting from New York to Liverpool does not assemble a council over his ocean-chart and fix an angle by which to lash the rudder for the whole voyage.  A human intelligence must be at the helm to discern the shifting forces of the waters and the winds.  A human hand must be on the helm to feel the elements day by day, and guide to a mastery over them.  Such preparations are everything.  Without them a legislative command fixing a day, an official promise fixing a day, are shams.  They are worse --they are a snare and a delusion to all who trust them.  They destroy all confidence among thoughtful men, whose judgment will at last sway public opinion.

In conclusion, then, and in view of the futile efforts made thus far to resume, can any pretend it can be done by the date stated ?  As well try to reach the moon by sliding up on its beams !  It was a law for which no democrat voted.  It was a law for the enforcement of which no adequate provision is proposed by the party in power, Executive, Senate, or Congress.  It is kept on the statute as a delusion and a snare.  No substitute or condition of its repeal is now possible.  It stands there a menace to business, an impediment to resumption.  It has neither by its own vigor remonetized silver or gold.  It is a dead letter.  It is an unpleasant body, and should be removed and buried.  Passed without debate, forced into a law without amendment, useless for industrial or fiscal relief, baseless for all useful foundations of specie, conceived in party scheming and brought forth in distress and disaster, it should be removed without delay and slaughtered without mercy.

The committee of which I have the honor to be the chairman, sir, have treated the House with as much fairness as the House has treated them.  We had leave by your courtesy to report upon this subject at any time.  We have not abused that privilege.  Even if we differed and delayed as to what we should report, we felt bound in honor to allow the majority of the House to pass upon this and similar measures.  And now, sir, our report is made and the time has come for your action.  I hope a vote will be taken;  and if this negative measure be not sufficient for the great end we have in view, let the other bill pass for a commission to inquire and report more positive legislation next session.  I call for the previous question upon the substitute for the bill as reported by the committee.

Mr. Lawrence.  Let the substitute of the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hewitt] be read.

The Clerk read as follows:

Be it enacted, &c., That a commission is hereby authorized and constituted, to consist of three Senators, to be appointed by the Senate, three members of the House of Representatives, to be appointed by the Speaker, and three experts, to be selected by and associated with them, with authority to determine the time and place of meeting and to take evidence;  whose duty it shall be to consider what measures are necessary and practicable in order to bring about the resumption of specie payments at the earliest possible time consistent with a due regard to the interests of the country, and to report a bill embodying the results of their investigations on or before the 15th day of December, A.D. 1876.

The question was taken on the substitute of Mr. Hewitt, of New York;  and there were--- ayes 92, nays 104; not voting 9;

The Clerk read the original bill introduced by Mr. Goode and referred to the Committee on Banking and Currency, as follows:

A bill (H.R. No. 3074) to repeal in part the resumption act of 1875.

Be it enacted, &c., That so much of section 3 of an act entitled "An act to provide for the resumption of specie payments," approved January 14, 1875, as provides that "on and after the 1st day of January, A.D. 1879, the Secretary of the Treasury shall redeem in coin the United States legal-tender notes then outstanding on their presentation for redemption," and so much of said section 3 of said act as authorizes the use of any surplus revenue, or the issue, sale, or disposal of any bonds to provide for such redemption, are hereby repealed.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Clerk will now read the substitute reported by the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency.

The Clerk read as follows:

A bill to repeal the resumption day clause in the resumption act of 1875.

Be it enacted, &c., That the resumption-day clause in section 3 of an act entitled "An act to provide for the resumption of specie payments," approved January 14, 1875, which clause is in the words following, to wit, "and on and after the 1st day of January, A.D. 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 $50 dollars," be, and the same is hereby, repealed.

Mr. Springer.  I rise to a parliamentary inquiry.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair will hear the gentleman.

Mr. Springer.  The bill reported by this committee was reported as a bill independent of itself and as a substitute for the bill introduced by the gentleman from Virginia, [Mr. Goode.]  This bill being a complete bill, with a title different from that of the other, the record ought to show, if it does not, that it was read a first and second time;  because it never could have been subject to amendment till it had been.  An amendment was offered by the gentleman from New York [Mr. Hewitt] and voted on.  Therefore the question is, shall this bill be engrossed and read a third time ?  That is the question before this House.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair overrules the gentleman's point of order.

Mr. Holman.  I now move to reconsider the vote by which the yeas and nays were ordered on the substitute, so that the yeas and nays may be taken on the final passage of the bill.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The main question was ordered on the bill and pending amendments, and when the previous question has been only partially executed the motion to reconsider cannot be made.

Mr. Kasson.  If the House gives unanimous consent to treat this bill reported by the committee as the original bill, then would not one vote end it ?  Cannot the House give that unanimous consent ?

The Speaker pro tempore.  Certainly.

Mr. Randall.  I submit that the committee could not report a substitute for a bill not before the House.

Mr. Kasson.  If the House by unanimous consent consents to treat this as an original bill, that ends the trouble.

The Speaker pro tempore.  By unanimous consent that may be done, but in no other way.  Is there objection to regarding the bill reported as a substitute as the original bill and taken up and put upon its final passage now ?  The Chair hears no objection.

Mr. Holman.  To make it correspond with the record it should be stated that it is a substitute for the original bill.

The Speaker pro tempore.  Certainly as a substitute;  and the question is now upon the final passage of the bill, upon which the yeas and nays are demanded.

The yeas and nays were ordered.

The Speaker pro tempore.  The Chair understands that all questions are waived upon this bill except as to its passage.  Is that the understanding of the House ? [Cries of "Yes, yes."]  Then the only question is, shall the bill pass ?

Mr. Springer.  As I desire to take the next train to leave the city, I ask unanimous consent to record my vote now and before my name is reached upon the regular call of the roll.

There was no objection.

The question was taken;  and there were-- yeas 106, nays 86, not voting 93;  as follows:

Yeas--- Messrs. Ainsworth, Anderson, Atkins, Banning, Bland, Boone, Bradford, Bright, Young Brown, William Brown, Cabell, John Caldwell, William Caldwell, Campbell, Cannon, Cason, Cate, Caulfield, John Clarke of Kentucky, John Clark of Missouri, Clymer, Cochrane, Collins, Cook, Cox, Dibrell, Douglas, Durham, Eden, Evans, Faulkner, Felton, Finley, Forney, Fort, Franklin, Gause, Goode, Goodin, Gunter, Harrison, Hartzell, Haymond, Henkle, Hereford, Holman, Hooker, Hopkins, House, Hubbell, Hunton, Hurd, Thomas Jones, Franklin Landers, Lane, Lawrence, Lewis, Lynde, Mackey, Maish, McFarland, McMahon, Milliken, Mills, Morgan, Mutchler, Neal, New, Payne, Phelps, Poppleton, Randall, Rea, Reagan, John Reilly, Rice, Riddle, Robinson, Savage, Sheakley, Singleton, Slemons, William Smith, Southard, Springer, Stenger, Stevenson, Stone, Teese, Thomas, Throckmorton, Tucker, Turney, Van Vorbes, John Vance, Waddell, Gilbert Walker, Walsh, Erastus Wells, Whitthorne, James Williams, Jeremiah Williams, Wilshire, Benjamin Wilson, Yeates, and Young --106.

Nays---- Messrs. Abbott, Adams, Bagby, George Bagley, John Bagley, William Baker, Ballon, Banks, Bell, Blair, Horatio Burchard, Caswell, Chittenden, Conger, Crounse, Cutler, Danford, Davy, Durand, Eames, Ely, Freeman, Frye, Gibson, Hale, Hancock, Hardenbergh, Benjamin Harris, Henderson, Abram Hewitt, Hoar, Hoge, Hyman, Joyce, Kasson, Kehr, Kimball, Lamar, Lapham, Levy, Lynch, MacDougall, McCrary, Meade, Metcalfe, Miller, Monroe, Morrison, Nash, Norton, O'Brien, Odell, O'Neill, Packer, Page, Pierce, Piper, Platt, Potter, Powell, Pratt, Rainey, Miles Ross, Rusk, Sampson, Schleicher, Sinnickson, Smalls, Herr Smith, Strait, Stowell, Thompson, Thornburgh, Washington Townsend, Tufts, Wait, Charles Walker, Ward, Warren, Wiley Wells, White, Whiting, Alpheus Williams, Willis, James Wilson, and Woodburn --86.

Not Voting--- Messrs. Ashe, John Baker, Bass, Beebe, Blackburn, Bliss, Blount, Bradley, Buckner, Samuel Burchard, Burleigh, Candler, Chapin, Cowan, Crapo, Culberson, Darrall, Davis, De Bolt, Denison, Dobbins, Dunnell, Egbert, Ellis, Foster, Fuller, Garfield, Glover, Andrew Hamilton, Robert Hamilton, Haralson, Henry Harris, John Harris, Hartridge, Hatcher, Hathorn, Hays, Hendee, Goldsmith Hewitt, Hill, Hoskins, Hunter, Hurlbut, Jenks, Frank Jones, Kelley, King, Knott, George Landers, Leavenworth, LeMoyne, Lord, Luttrell, Magoon, McDill, Money, Oliver, John Philips, William Phillips, Plaisted, Purman, James Reilly, John Robbins, William Robbins, Roberts, Sobieski Ross, Sayler, Scales, Schumaker, Seelye, Sparks, Spencer, Swann, Tarbox, Terry, Martin Townsend, Robert Vance, Waldron, Alexander Wallace, John Wallace, Walling, Wheeler, Whitehouse, Wigginton, Wike, Willard, Andrew Williams, Charles Williams, James Williams, Willia Williams, Alan Wood, Fernando Wood, and Woodworth --93.

So the bill was passed.