In response to a resolution of the Legal Tender Club, of St.'Louis, Mo.,
THE HON. JOHN MAGWIRE
-delivered the following address in Turner's Hall, on Saturday
evening, April 22, 1876:.
I have been requested by members of the Legal Tender Club
No. 1, of the City of St. Louis, to furnish such facts as I may
-think tend to show that the present high rate of taxation and rate
that Congress has fixed for interest to be paid on the National
Debt, is the primary cause that hash produced the present conflict
and antagonism  between productive labor aid  unproductive
capital.
And if it can be made manifest that the present high rate of the
tax on productive industry has resulted in discord and strife, then
the remedy, and the only remedy, is to lower the rate of taxation
-so as to produce a proper equilibrium; that is to say, there should
be established some plan for an equitable distribution of the net
productions of labor and capital.
Now, in order to establish and carry into effect a plan for
lowering the present high rate of taxation (and when I use the
word taxation, I include the rate of interest the government fixed,on the public debt), for all interest paid for the loan or hire of
money, is a tax on labor, and is paid by labor.
Now the question as to whether or not this high rate of taxa"tion can be reduced to the rate of increase in the national wealth
by natural production (which is at the rate of 3~ per cent. per
annum compounded), is a question of power, and it is with that
question that I wish to deal.
And in dealing with the question of power, I have made no
attempt at fine writing. I have confined myself to a statement of




2
facts that are upon the record, and without any regard to the
rules of rhetoric, the correctness of diction, or ornaments of
style:
"When important interests are at stake, when momentous
questions are to be considered, elaborate oratory is contemptible."
- Webster.
By the law of nature, which, says Sir William Blackstone, is
coeval with mankind, and dictated by God himself, every community has. an inherent right to provide the means to relieve their
necessities. This inherent right need not be declared, it is older
than written constitutions or municipal laws.
An eminent Doctor of the Divine Law states: "God, when he
created man, did not deliver him to the mercy of chance; He
gave him the right of fulfilling his necessities, and has imposed on
him the care of his own preservation as a duty."
And when the Almighty created the human race, ample provision was made for their sustenance: "Of the things pertaining
to this earth, there are some which belong to us in common with
all others, such as light, air, water and the soil."
Now, of those common gifts, no one is entitled to a surplus
which will deprive another of a sufficiency.
There is, however, but one of the common gifts that man can be
deprived of a sufficiency, and that is the one most essential for his
existence, namely —a sufficiency of the soil as a right belonging to
every individual. Without that sufficiency of the soil, man would
be rendered incapable of fulfilling the duties imposed on him,
namely-the care of his own preservation."
The main inquiry as to the amount of soil man is entitled to as
a sufficiency, is readily answered in the abstract. It cannot be a
less quantity than that necessary to provide himself with shelter,
and he is not entitled as a gift to any greater quantity. Man,
being provided with shelter, is at liberty to pursue whatever
calling his genius, talents or tastes may lead him. But in the
event of failure to support himself by his industry, or inability to
find employment for a time, he is entitled to a shelter to fall back
upon. And it is the chief duty as well as the prime interest of
the State, to provide for the support of the individual citizen.
The State never can survive the loss of the citizen, or the citizen
the loss of his sufficiency.




3
I do not mean that the State ought to support the citizen. He
must support himself.
But it is the duty as well as the interest of the State to provide
that the citizen, with the co-operation of his means for labor,
should have the uninterrupted privilege of taking to himself a
sufficiency of the soil as a right belonging to him, as a common
gift, in order that he may fulfill all the requirements of the care
for his own preservation as a duty.
This, my friends, is a question that underlies the financial question, and one of far greater moment to the American people in its
consequences, than all others that may arise in our system of
political economy. This important question I have had much at
heart for several years. I have hitherto elaborated it fully as to
the plan for carrying it into practical effect, it has been submitted:to some of the most eminent philosophers and jurists in the land,,and by them endorsed.
I cannot argue the financial question without founding it upon
the avowal that it is essential for communities to exercise their
*inherent right to provide the means to relieve their necessities
whenever the exigencies happen.
It is upon this inherent right of self-preservation, one of the
most sacred rights that God has given to' man, that we derive the
power to provide ourselves with all things needful for our preservation; nay, it is a duty imposed upon man by the Creator.
The necessities of a nation beget its attributes, and every;community, being endowed with the power for self-preservation,,can exercise that inherent power as they may think best for the
common good.
"But there must be government and the obligations of obedience. There is no theory so clear, simple and solid."
The authority which commands obedience should be legitimately
established.
Now, this brings us to the inquiry as to how legitimate author-,ity may be established?
Wherever sovereignty resides in a nation: government
belongs.
When John C. Calhoun was asked the question:  "What is
government?"  He answered promptly:  "It is the will of the
governed."  That may be true of a monarchy, but in a republic




4
it is the will of the governor, that is to say, in republican America
the government is the will of a majority of all the electoral people
of all the States? hence, in our republic the government belongs to
and is inherent in the people.
But agents to perform the duties thereof are necessary, and.
therefore are created-say a President, a Congress, a judiciary.
This agency is not the government, however, nor is there a sentence or word in the Constitution of the United States which so,
denominates them.
In a monarchy the government and the people are distinct.
bodies-kings, lords and commons, as in Ecclesiastes, the clergy
and the laity. In a republic the people and the government are
one and the same; hence, the agencies of this republic, commonly
called the government, are but a delegated body, and cannot, in
the very essence of their creation, perform any of their functions
without authority from their principal.  When those agents go.
beyond their jurisdiction, and undertake to exercise powers not
granted or specifically stated in the charter, their acts are void,,
and must necessarily be so, if the life of the republic is of any
valh.
Now, in order to settle the question of power, I have briefly
referred to the facts of history-facts that I did not make, nor
can I alter them. It is, therefore, upon those historical facts that
we derive the power to provide ourselves with the means necessary
for self-preservation.
The question now in hand is simply this:  How is the present
high rate of taxation to be reduced?  The question of power to.
lower the rate is not open to controversy. This power resides in
the sovereign and not in the agents, and can be exercised as the
sovereign may think proper; that is to say, the agents whom the
sovereign may appoint can be instructed by positive order to carry
into effect the will of the sovereign.
The Congress can not, therefore, plant themselves on the power
granted in the Constitution, to make money for any other purpose
than to supply the National Treasury with a sufficient amount of
legal tender tokens of sovereign power, which will enable that
officer, at all times, to meet demands that may, from time to time,
be proved up against the government, and that officer (the Secretary of the Treasury) is appointed for no other purpose than to




keep safe the legal tender tokens of sovereign power placed in his
hands, and to tender those tokens in payment of all proved claims
that may be presented. This is all of the functions the Secretary
is required to perform, and when he appears upon the floor of
Congress, acting as a lobbyist for money rings, or making suggestions as to what uses may be made of the money token after it has
left the treasury, he is forgetful of the dignity as well as the
duties of his station, and he ought therefore be required to keep
in his proper legitimate position.
Great stress is put upon the power granted to Congress in the
Constitution in regard to furnishing the treasury with that which
shall be a legal tender for all demands proved up against the
government. And here again and again I repeat the fact that
the Congress has no power in the Constitution, or out of it, to
issue the token of sovereignty for. any other purpose than is sufficient to supply the National Treasury with the amount needed to
carry on the government and meet appropriations or demands
against the government.
And the Secretary is prohibited by express words in the Constitution "from allowing any money to be withdrawn from the
treasury, unless to meet appropriations made by law." It is so
important that this prohibition be understood, and not misunderstood, that I quQte the section referred to in the Constitution:
"Section 9, article 6. No money shall be drawn from the
treasury but in consequence of appropriations made by law; and
a regular statement and account of the receipts and expenditures
of all public money shall be published from time to time."
Now that section of the Constitution leaves no such question as
inflating or contracting the currency. It is a slang phrase, used
by money rings, that has no meaning.
The Congress may place in the treasury as many blanks as they
please; the Secretary can no more put the stamp or token of
the sovereign upon them, or deliver them to a stranger who has
no claim against the government, than the clerk of a court, State
or federal, can issue an execution unless it is founded upon a
judgment, regularly entered upon the record of the court.
Now we will turn to the section in the Constitution that grants
to the Congress power to supply the treasury with blank warrants,
executions or tokens of the sovereign power, sufficient to meet




6
appropriations made by law, keeping in mind all the while the
prominent fact that the Congress has no power, no authority, in
the Constitution or out of it, to issue the warrant or token of the
sovereign for any other purpose, or to regulate its value, except to
make it a legal standard for payment and settling of disputes, than
to regulate the value of horses, lumber or wheat.
The power granted is found in section 8, article 5:  "To coin
money, regulate the value thereof, and of foreign coin, and fix the
standard of weights and measures."
To coin money? Coin it of what material the section does not
specify. The expression is therefore indefinite and vague as to
the material. If the words "to make money," had been used,
that would not prohibit its being coined or made in any other
mode.
Strict constructionists of the section 8, article 5, invoke the aid
of the 10th section to give force to the words "coin money": Section 10, article 1. "No State shall coin money, emit bills of
credit, make any thing but gold and silver a legal tender in payment of debts."
Now, no words can be more explicit than the prohibition that
"' no State shall emit bills of credit, or make anything but gold
and silver a legal tender." Now, what does that express prohibition amount to? Every State in the Union, when it became
necessary to provide the means to relieve their necessities, granted
power to corporations, authorizing them to emit bills of credit,
and the States were stockholders in banks that emitted bills of
credit (and often very doubtful bills); and the people in every
State in the Union use copper and nickel as a legal tender in the
payment of debts.
In the face of these notorious facts it is contended that the
indefinite words "to coin money," implies that it should be coined
from gold, although the word gold does not appear.
We will now turn back to the Constitution itself, and inquire
what were the powers granted in regard to making money.
The States possessed the absolute right to make money, and
each of the States exercised that right, and made money of various
materials, by fixing the token thereto by law before they made the
Constitution.




7
The general government, in the Constitution, obtained full
power. to make money, previously owned by the individual States,
and can therefore, by force of the grant if nothing else, coin money
out of any material it chooses, or make it by another method.
But the grant gave no power to Congress that authorized that
body to make money for any other purpose, as said before, than
to supply the National Treasury with the amount needed to meet
appropriations, and Congress is especially restricted in the amount
needed.
To supply the treasury with a sufficient amount of legal tender
blanks, in order that, when demands are proved up against the
government, the secretary or proper officer may affix the seal, the
stamp, or token of the sovereign upon it and tender the same to
the claimant, is a part of the machinery of the government-State
and federal.
The State legislatures furnish the local courts with blank warrants and executions. When the courts enter a judgment, the
party in whose favor the judgment is recorded, is entitled to and
receives a warrant or execution, with the seal of the sovereign
State upon it, and by authority of that seal, he can command the
proper officer to seize the property of the defendant in the execution, and have the possession of the same transferred to the plaintiff in the execution, or to some one who will satisfy the demand,
and to execute and deliver to the plaintiff a deed for the property.
This practice is going on in thousands of cases every day all over
the land, and the title of property is transferred by virtue of the
seal of the sovereign State, upon paper without using the money
token of the general government.
Now the practice of the general government must be in harmony with that of the States, from which the federal government
derived its power.
When a demand has been proved up against the general government, it is in the nature of a judgment and the claimant is entitled
to his execution, legal tender or token of the sovereign.
The judgment of a State Court and a demand against the
general government, which has passed through the various auditing bureaus, becomes a judgment not essentially differing from the
judgment of the State Court.  The execution, legal tender or
money token, issued by the Secretary of the Treasury on a judg



8
ment against the government, differs from the execution or warrant
issued by the State authority, in this: the execution issued by
authority of the State, is limited in jurisdiction and in durationit has power to transfer the title of the property of the defendant
in the execution, but none other. The execution or legal tender
token issued by the Secretary of the Treasury, is unlimited in
duration, and its jurisdiction is co-extensive with that of the sovereign whose impress or token it bears; moreover, the token of the
supreme sovereign possesses power to extinguish the execution and
judgment of the inferior authority and power to extinguish all
demands and obligations for payment within the realm, that is to
say, wherever there is a demand proved up'or a contract agreed
upon a judgment or taxes, a tender of the token issued by authority
of a law of Congress will extinguish the demand, whether the
claimant accepts it or not.
Now, the value that persons not parties to a judgment, contract
or obligation for payment, may put upon the token, is a question
that has nothing to do with the power of the token of sovereignty.
The token of sovereign power, whilst it possesses power to transfer
the title of commercial commodities, is not a commodity. It is not
founded upon any commercial commodity, it is not redeemable in
commodities, nor is it founded on the property and wealth of the
nation, for the government does not own the property or wealth of
the nation; nor can the government take the property of the
individual citizen and exchange it for the token; nor is it founded
on the honor, integrity and good faith of the nation. Honor,
integrity and good faith are very pleasant phrases used in writing
and speaking; but outside the statute book there is no such thing.
This assertion is founded upon the fact that there does not exist
any exterior visible tribunal that claims to possess power or
authority to decide questions of honor, integrity and good faith;
and of course no such tribunal is recognized. If public opinion
is invoked, nothing thereby can be determined with certainty,
because public opinion to-day may not be public opinion to-morrow.
Now, this brings us to the question: If the token of sovereign
power is not a commodity, is not founded on a commodity, is not
redeemable in a commodity, is not founded upon the property or
wealth of the nation, nor the honor, integrity and good faith of
the nation, then it is incumbent upon the party who makes those




.denials to show what the legal tender token of the sovereign issued
by the Secretary of the Treasury is founded upon. It is founded
upon a law that has been approved by the Congress and signed by
the President-a law that declares the legal tender token of
sovereign power that the secretary has tendered to the party
whose claim against the government has been regularly approved;
that a tender of the token shall be a valid fulfilment of all obligations for payment within the realm, whether the claimant accepts
it or not.
The question as to what may be the value of the legal tender
token to the parties accepting it after it leaves the treasury, is not
of concern to the government nor to what use the party may
choose to make of it.  The government is only concerned in
enforcing obedience to law of Congress in regard to the token of
the sovereign, the same as in all other provision of the laws.
This brings us to the question, where does the power reside that
can enforce the laws? In the States the power is in the executive
officer of the State, who can call out the militia of the State if
there is resistance offered. In like manner can the supreme executive officer, the President, who is commanhder-in-chief of the army
and navy, use that power, if necessary, to enforce the law.
But it is contended that a law of Congress that will oblige a
claimant to take a token of the sovereign impressed upon paper,
that has no inherent value in itself, as a commercial commodity,
is an unjust law. It is, says some, repudiation to offer for services
or for values furnished the government, paper that is valueless as
a commodity, that cannot be sold in foreign countries.
Such a statement is a perversion of the facts. The government
does not fix the value of its token of power, its value is fixed by
the party that has consented to accept it for services or values.
The Congress fixes the number and amount of the token that
will be tendered to those who may consent to accept appointments
to offices the government needs fulfilled, but the Congress does not
possess power to compel men to accept an office. If they do
accept, however, they accept on the terms offered, and they are
the exclusive judges as to whether or not the compensation offered
is adequate to the services to be rendered or for the values voluntarily given. The Congress has fixed the salary of the President
at $200,000 for the term of four years, but Congress cannot force




10
anyone to accept that offer unless he pleases. If he does accept,
he fixes the value of that which he has agreed to take, and so of
all other officers.
When Carl Schurz was roaming over the country for the past
three or four years, in his long, windy speeches denouncing greenbacks as worthless rags, the people could not forget that he
accepted greenbacks for his six years' services as Senator, and that
he exerted all of his ability and cunning in trying to get back to
the Senate, and take his pay in what he called worthless rags.
And so it is when the government is in need of supplies. Proposals are received for furnishing the same; the government does
not fix the value, that is done by the parties who offer to furnish
what is wanted. In no instance has the government the exclusive
power to fix values, except when the soldier is conscripted, his pay
is fixed at the same rate of him who has voluntarily enlisted.
When the government takes private property for public use, the
value thereof is determined by a jury.
Now I have stated, as well as my feeble ability will permit, the
facts which I think show or tend to show, the theory upon which
our republic is founded, and alluded to the modes and instrumentalities necessary, in order that every citizen may enjoy the right
to fulfill all the duties required for his own preservation.
Because of something wrong in the machinery of our government, where there are wheels within wheels, some have got out of
gear, and this has, to use a mechanic's phrase, produced backlashes that are wrecking the entire fabric.  When a machine is
constructed on correct philosophical principles, and becomes deranged and entangled, the fault is to be found in unskillful or
unfaithful engineers having been employed.  This rule is as
applicable to the machinery of the government as to the mechanical arts.
That there is at the present time something radically wrong in
the working machinery of our government, is evidenced by the
fact, that in the midst of a superabundance of the productions of
the earth, capable of affording every individual in the land a
sufficient supply of all things needful for their sustenance, industrial pursuits, that tend every year to add to the nation's wealth,
by the general development of our resources, are paralyzed; our
railroads are, with few exceptions, bankrupt; our factories, in




many localities, are at a stand; others have failed, consequent upon
their profits first, then their capital being absorbed by a high rate
<of taxation; thereby turning out of employment thousands of
laborers, skilled and unskilled, naked upon the world, deprived of
the means for shelter, driven by necessity, in numerous instances,
to beg, to starve, to steal, to violate the laws. Many, unable to.endure their sad condition, destroy their lives as if to afford
relief.
Our jails, penitentiaries and alms houses are crowded with those
who had been American freemen, capable of fulfilling all the
~duties required for self-preservation; men of genius and talents
equal to any in the land are incarcerated behind prison bars,
because, by necessity for want of employment and the means to
provide shelter, they became vicious and violate the law. So it is
with the children in our metropolitan cities, for want of shelter,consequent upon a want of employment, they are exposed to
temptations and fall into vicious habits that rarely ever can be
eradicated.
There is an other evil that afflicts society more than all others.
In its consequences, when we critically trace it to its source, it is
found in the unjust and unequal tax the government has imposed
on the laborers of the country. I approach this branch of my
argument cautiously, because of its tender delicacy. It is, nevertheless, a momentous question that ought not be overlooked-it
is the social condition of American women in certain localities. It
is a well-established doctrine-indeed, it is a dogma of the system,of civilization inculcated and enforced by the legislator of Judeathat society must be founded on woman's dignity. That dignity
cannot be maintained if woman is deprived of her rights-her
rights as spouse, as wife, as mother, her civil rights.  Now, this
assertion is founded on the fact that there are in some of the
States from seventy-five to one hundred thousand more women
than mep (vide census reports).  Where are the men that ought
to mate those women?  It is a historical fact that there are as
many male children born as females; consequently, where there
exists so large a preponderance of females, the same number of
males did at some time exist in the same locality. But consequent
upon the high rate of taxation on labor, thereby absorbing the
net productions of labor and capital, the capital has been with



12
drawn from industrial pursuits and concentrated in government
bonds and in national banks chartered by the Congress without
authority from the Constitution; consequently, the men have
tranfsported themselves to other localities to find employment, leaving the women, that it is man's duty to protect and provide for,.
lonely, helpless, deprived of the means necessary for the fulfillment
of the duties required of them by the law of their creation. As a
consequence of their sad condition, many of these must go mad.
I leave this melancholy statement of facts-facts that has touched
the hearts of the purest patriots among us-and proceed to give
the facts that has produced the evils that exist.
It is a fact that the high rate of taxation the Congress has, by.law, established and collects in the way of interest on the publicdebts has, as a consequence, resulted in inflicting on society the
evils now complained of-evils that cannot be endured much
longer. Now, wherefore, was this high rate of taxation established
by laws of Congress? Was it necessary in order to carry on the
machinery of the government? If it can be made appear that it
was tot necessary, then the question is narrowed down to the
single point of inquiry, namely: Who are the parties that ought.
to be held responsible?
The legislative department of the government is solely in the
hands of and conducted by the agents the people appoint to transact their business in the Congress of the nation. If it can be
made to appear that they have acted in a manner, that either
through mistake or otherwise, in conducting the affairs of the
government, evil consequences has been the result, then the first
inquiry is: Were those agents capable, were they qualified and
possessed the necessary skill for carrying on the machinery of the
government?
Second. Have they been faithful in attending to the duties of
their station?
If it can be made appear that those agents do not possess the
requisite knowledge and skill that will qualify them for the position to which they were appointed, then the responsibility rests.
mainly upon the examining committee or caucus that recommended their appointment. If, on the other hand, it is found that
those agents have been unmindful of the dignity of the position
they occupy as agents of the sovereign people, or if it can be made




13
to appear that they have been neglectful or inattentive to the
duties of their station, then, and in that case the responsibility
rests solely upon those agents, whether they' are qualified or not.
We will now consider that part of the machinery of the government which requires the Congress to furnish the National Treasury
with a sufficient amount of legal tender tokens of the sovereign
power to meet appropriations made by law, keeping in view the
fact, however, that the Congress has no power or authority in the
Constitution or out of it, to furnish the token of sovereignty for
any other purpose whatsoever.
Now we come to the inquiry: How has Congress supplied the
wants of the treasury?  And we will confine the inquiry to the
period in time dating from the commencement of the war in 1861.
-When the war began, in order to save the life of the government,
armies and a navy had to be organized and equipped. The time
had arrived "when the nation could beget its attributes."
We could equip, and did equip, the armies and navy with all
the implements of warfare necessary for carrying on the war.
The army must have soldiers and ammunition, guns and cannon
balls, supplies for feeding the soldiers. These we -produced in
abundance, and of such quality and material as best calculated to
answer the purpose. The soldiers needed something to send back
to their families, in order that they could have a support while
the husbands and fathers were engaged in saving the life of the
government, and thereby protecting the lives and property of those
who remained at home.
The treasury soon became empty. The Congress possessed the
same power to supply the wants of the treasury as to supply the
army with implements of warfare.
All State banks that had emitted bills of credit founded on a
false basis, failed. There was no money left in the country but
the legal tender tokens the government had impressed on gold and
silver. Those metal tokens were speedily hid away, and most of
it transported to other countries. The government tried the
experiment of offering bonds for the loan of gold and silver. The
bonds of the government before the war, commanded a premium
of twenty-five cents on the dollar. After the war commenced,
eighty cents on the dollar was the highest bid received, and only
for a small amount. Then the exigency had happened when the




14
nation was forced to exercise her sovereign attribute of inherent
power for self-preservation. Congress authorized the Secretary of
the Treasury to issue a sufficient amount of the token of sovereignty upon paper to pay the soldiers and for supplies. The law
authorizing the issue of the greenbacks as passed by the Lower
House of Congress, made them a legal tender for all demands.
When it went to the Senate for concurrence, the gold rings from
Wall street were there, and protested against the passage of a law
that would make the token of sovereignty expressed on paper as
valid a legal tender as if on metal. Those gold rings brought
their money power to bear on the Senators, forced them to act
against their convictions by virtually telling them what Queen
Elizabeth said to the Bishop of London when he objected to some
of her whims: " Proud prelate, I made you, and if you do not
obey, by G-d I will unfrock you."
The bill was amended in the Senate so as to suit the gold rings;
the greenbacks were to be a legal tender for everything except
interest on the public debt and duties on imports. Now, if Congress could supply the treasury with a sufficient amount of legal
tender tokens, greenbacks, to pay the officers, soldiers and all
needful supplies for carrying on the war, wherefore create a
public debt? Wherefore stop issuing greenbacks and issue bonds
payable in greenbacks? If the necessary amount of greenbacks,
say one billion, had been issued, it would have been ample to
supply the treasury, and neither bonds nor a public debt would
ever had existence. But it was manifest to the gold rings that
such a policy would leave them no margin, and therefore it was,
that they stopped the issuing of greenbacks before one-half the
amount needed to supply the treasury had been made. Bonds
were issued, payable in greenbacks, and a tax laid upon the labor
of the country to pay the interest, with the proviso that the bonds
were not to be taxed.
Now, we will give the results of that policy:
There were issued, from 1862 to 1868, bonds to the amount
of 1,854,866,150 dollars, and 1,235,879,416 dollars was received
for them. These figures, which I found upon the record in the
Treasury Bureau in 1870, show a loss' to the government of
618,986,734 dollars, and a gain to the bondholders of that
amount. The record shows that the bonds were sold for an




15
average of fifty-five cents on the dollar; that is to say, the
purchaser of the bond received a credit upon the National
ledger for fifty-five cents cash, and by profit and loss account,
forty-five cents.
But inasmuch as the bonds were made payable in greenbacks
at our own treasury, thus keeping the debt a home debt, the loss
to the government was a gain to her individual citizens, and was
not, therefore, a loss to the nation.
After the bonds were put on the market, the greenbacks that
would purchase bonds were denounced by the gold rings as a
legalized fraud, in order to purchase the greatest amount in
greenbacks with the smallest amount of gold, then turn the
greenbacks into a bond, bearing a semi-annual interest of six
per cent. in gold.  In 1864, 2800 dollars in greenbacks were
purchased with 1000 dollars in gold, then converted into a six
per cent. bond for 2800 dollars. The gold interest on the 2800
dollars, collected semi-annually to the present time, will amount
to twice and a half times the amount of gold paid for the greenbacks that were converted into the 2800 dollar bond; and, to-day,
the holder of the bond can get 3200 dollars in gold for his 2800
dollar bond-a sum three times, plus 200 dollars, greater than his
first outlay-having received meanwhile 2500 dollars interest in
gold.
Now, can any one belive that the holders of the 5-20 bonds
desired to alter the contract they had entered into with.the government, when they purchased bonds that have proved to be so
good an investment for their money.
No, the scheme for altering that contract did not primarily
originate with the holders of the 5-20 bonds. It was a plan laid
by the money brokers of England to get control of the money
power of the American republic, by using Ex-Secretary Hugh
McCullough and Jay Cooke as conduits in making a connection
between the money dealers in England and the gold rings of
Wall street, who control the legislation of Congress in regard to
the financial question.
Now, this operation must be founded on facts, or supported by
circumstantial evidence, in order to be convincing.
In order to proceed logically, we must connect the circumstantial proof as it appears upon the records of history. England's




16
jealousy of our growing political power is notorious, and that if
opportunity ever offered that England and France could, by interference in our domestic affairs, break up our republic, they would
avail themselves of the occasion, if it should so happen. When
the rebellion commenced, in 1861, both England and France
exhibited unmistakable evidence of their desire to aid those who
had undertaken to break up the government and found a new
government, as they proclaimed, with negro slavery as the corner
stone. Such a policy would.have enabled England to continue,
by her masterly statesmanship, control of the commerce of the
world.
But after Secretary Seward had directed our minister at London
to notify the sovereigns of Europe and the world, that the people
of America would settle their difficulties in their own way, and
that interference on the part of foreign nations would not be permitted, neither England nor France, after that notice, made any
open hostile demonstrations of interference.  Nevertheless, it is
notorious, that the armies engaged on the side of the rebellionists
were fitted out and equipped by England and France, with everything except the officers and soldiers. And this was done with a
view to cripple American commerce, in order that England would
not have so formidable a competitor as America in the markets of
the world.
In 1869, in a letter of the National Labor Union Organization,
addressed to President Grant, before he delivered his inaugural,
His Excellency's attention was called to the following, which was
published a few days before in an English paper called the Manchester Guardian:
"In 1850, England paid eighty millions for raw cotton, put it
through her factories, and brought it out worth two hundred and
forty-two millions. In 1860 she doubled the value, made the
excess of value attained three hundred millions more; that the
cotton famine in 1864, consequent upon the cessation of the American supply, had cost her fifteen millions in poor relief. Mr.
Robuck and Mr. Bazely, members of Parliament, and Jacob Bright,
at a meeting of the'Chamber of Commerce, said:'Englishmen
are gradually becoming alive to the fact that Americans are in a
fair way to supplant them in all the most coveted markets of the
world."'




17
It was manifest from the utterances of those English statesmen,
that unless they could secure control of the money power of
America, they could not control the most coveted markets of the'world.
Says England's historian, Lord Macaulay: "That a Jew should'be privy counselor to a christian king, would be an eternal dis-'grace to the nation. But the Jew may govern the money market,
and the money market governs the world. The minister may be
in doubt as to his schemes of finance till he has been closeted with
the Jew. A congress of sovereigns may be forced to summon the
Jew to their assistance. The scroll of the Jew on the back of a
piece of paper, may be worth more than the royal word of three
kings, or the national faith of three American republics."
The money power, Macaulay truly said, rules the world, and the
nation that abdicates her money power or transfers it to a foreign
nation, or to individuals who control monarchial governments by
the money power, will certainly control the nation that has abdi-'cated that power.
Pardon me if I dwell more at length upon the question of
sovereign power. Unless a nation possesses power to provide the
means for relieving the necessities of its people, or, in other words,
the means for self-preservation, and power to enforce her own
laws to that end, the government cannot hang together.
That the American people, in their sovereign capacity, do possess
all power necessary for self-preservation, and power to execute
their laws, has been practically and visibly demonstrated to the
whole world during the late war, the history of which will forever
stand as a monument of sovereign power. Never since the time
of Caesar, Charlemagne, the first Napoleon, Wellington or Bismarck, has the world produced greater masters in military science
than the American officers who conducted the late war on both
sides. Never has the world produced better soldiers. Says an
eminent historian: "Give the American soldiers a just cause, and
they will prove to be the best in the world. With all the activity
of the Frenchman, the reckless daring of the Irishman, the steadiiness of the German, and the pluck of the Englishman combined,
they are a power that all the nations of the world combined cannot
-overcome, with their inexhaustible resources for support.
c




18
When it became necessary to invoke the military power to save
the government, the Constitution and the civil law was swept by
the board for the time being. And the military power, during
that war, was enforced in a manner never exceeded in severity
and seeming cruelty by any monarchial or autocratic government
that has ever existed since the formation of governments founded
on the theory of Christian civilization; neither has it been exceeded by the iron-hearted and steel-gloved hand of oriental
pagan despotism. We witnessed, during the war, bodies of men
marched 9ut, who were prisoners of war, and shot down: men
who were not guilty of crime themselves.
I allude to these melancholy facts of history, not for the purpose of finding fault or to wound the feeling of any one, but for
the purpose of supporting my argument on the question of power.
It is, therefore, the military arm of the sovereign power that
must be relied upon to enforce the laws.
When the King of England declares: This shall be a sovereign
-that declaration, and nothing else, makes it a sovereign. When
the sovereign people of the United States, through their Congress,
has enacted a law that declares: This token of sovereign power
shall be a legal tender throughout the realm-then it is a legal
tender; and the facts I have stated show where the power resides
to enforce the laws of Congress.
The legal token of sovereign power does not, therefore, rest
upon any commercial commodity. The sovereign is not bound to
exchange commodities for it. It does not rest on the property or
wealth of the sovereign, or that of the individual citizen; neither
owns property nor wealth that can be taken or made tangible by
the owner of the token after it has left the treasury, to redeem
that token or exchange it for property, unless the owner of the
property chooses to make an exchange; nor is the token founded
on the honor, integrity and good faith of the nation. These are
figures of speech, as I have said before, that have no meaning, or
at least no force outside the statute book.
Having disposed of the question of power, we will turn to the
other question. The question now in hand is, how has the sovereign power been used, or abused, by the agents of the sovereign,
in regard to supplying the treasury with a sufficient amount of
the legal tender token of sovereignty to carry on the government,




1v:and to liquidate all demands against the government? not forgetting, however, that the treasurer is forbidden by the 9th sec.,of the Constitution "from allowing any money to be withdrawn
from the treasury unless to meet appropriations made by law."
Then comes the question: How can Congress supply the wants
of the treasury?
If I am right on the question of power, I will answer the question of expediency so as to defy criticism.
After the war commenced, our statesmen, it would appear, for
the first time, discovered that the necessities of a nation beget its
attributes.
The law authorizing the issue of the greenbacks, made them a
legal tender, and the bonds to be issued after the passage of that
law, were, by operation of the law, payable in greenbacks. The
government stopped issuing greenbacks and issued bonds-a fatal
mistake. If a sufficient amount of paper tokens of the sovereign
power had been ordered by Congress to supply the treasury, one
thousand million of dollars would have been ample for that purpose, and not one dollar of a public debt would now exist.
The Congress had power and authority to supply the wants
of the treasury with the token of sovereignty, and make it a legal
tender, but Congress had no power or authority to supply that
want with bonds or promises to pay, and levy a tax upon the
people to pay interest on bonds not taxed. They had no authority
under the Constitution for pursuing that policy.
Notwithstanding the loss to the government in the sale of bonds
it was a gain to the purchaser, and the bonds being payable at our
own treasury, in American money, keeping it a home debt, there
-could be no loss to the nation. The interest, also payable at our
treasury, the nation had the benefit of the labor necessary to pay
the interest. But if the debt and interest be transferred to a
foreign nation, the labor expended in paying the principal and
interest would be for the benefit of that nation.
To let the bonds stand under the law and contract for which they
were issued, kept the debt a home debt, within the jurisdiction and,control of our government. And so long as that debt remained a
-home debt, the nation could control her own money power —a
power, says Macaulay, that rules the world.




20
If the proposition was made by any foreign government, thatwe, as a nation, abdicate our political sovereignty and again
become colonies, it would be considered beneath contempt. But
when we transfer to a foreign nation the control of our money
power, and become the debtor of a foreign nation, we put ourselves
in a worse condition than to be colonies.
English statesmen- were well satisfied, after the close of our war,
that our government cannot be broken up, and that they have no.
power to interfere in our political affairs. But English statesmen
and England's money brokers saw that if they could obtain control of America's money power, they could control American
commerce and manufactories, and therefore a scheme was invented
for getting control by England of our money power.
A clamor was first started against the greenbacks, that they
were not money because not made of a commodity that could be
sold in a foreign market as merchandise. A large amount of the
bonds were purchased by English and German money dealers, who~
reside outside the jurisdiction of our government, but that is not
of consequence as long as the bonds are payable at our treasury
in greenbacks. The debt remains a home debt, no matter where
the holder of the obligation may reside.
Those bonds were duly executed, signed, sealed and recorded,
they were as binding on the obligees as on the obligors.
The Congress that executed those bonds acted as agent for both
of the contracting parties.
The Congress had no power, however, to bind the sovereign,
whose agents they were, in any such contract, and the sovereign
has power to repudiate contracts that the agent is not authorized
to make. That contract, although not binding on the sovereign,
was for the time being acquiesced in, because the parties were
within the jurisdiction and control of the sovereign.
But when the agents of the sovereign undertake to abrogate a
contract that has been duly executed and recorded, and bind the
sovereign to a new and different contract, their acts are utterly
void.  The Congress has power.to make treaties with foreign,
nations, but no power to bind the sovereign in contracts made with
individuals in foreign countries and outside the jurisdiction of the
sovereign.




21
Now, what has Congress done in regard to the 6-20 bonds payable, principal and interest, at our own treasury?
First, in order to have the way for changing payment of the
bonds in greenbacks, to payment in gold coin, a bill was introduced by the chairman of the finance committee of the Senate, in
March, 1869, and  became a law  on the 28th  of that month,
entitled a law to strengthen the public credit, as follows: " Be it
enacted that all obligations of the government shall be paid in
coin* or its equivalent." The parties who planned that law did
not venture to say gold coin, that would have been repugnant to,
and repealed the act declaring the greenbacks to be a valid legal
tender.
Coin or its equivalent?  When two equivalents meet, there can
be no remainder.
Notwithstanding we may logically demonstrate that the token
of sovereign power is not a commodity, or an article of merchandize, the value of which depends upon the varying commercial
value of any commodity; and notwithstanding that the progress
in science has dispelled all ideas not founded upon correct philosophical principles; nevertheless, gold appears to have had a mysterious hold on the people of all countries from the beginning.
The Hebrew historian records its existence in the second chapter
of Genesis; and it would appear throughout the sacred record
that by reason, perhaps of its great beauty to the eye, its immaculate purity and indestructibility, it was regarded as symbolic of,
and connected with, the Deity. When Moses was absent receiving
the law delivered to him on Mount Sinai, the people under his
immediate charge, to whom God had manifested his power by
repeated miracles, lost their faith and made a god of gold.  When
*COIN-Wedge; stamp; corner wedge; die for striking money. The word is sometimes
applied to wedging stone in masonry; a corner or jutting angle; a jutting point,
as a wall; a wedge for lowering, raising, fastening or leveling up anything, as a
cannon or printer's form. A piece of metal on which certain characters are
stamped, making it legal current money; stones jutting from a wall; to make; to
fabricate; to coin a word.
Some tale, some newly text he daily coined
To soothe his sister and delude her mind.-Dryden.
This is the very coinage of your brain.-Shakespeare.
The word coin is indefinite, and may signify many things. Laws are made for
arbitrary purposes; and words and phrases should be used that have a strictly
classical legal meaning.




22
the Priesthood was given to Aaron, "a crown of gold was put
upon his mitre, whereon was engraved Holiness, delightful to the
eye for its beauty."-(Ecclesiasticus, chap. xlv., v. 14). And it is
a fact of history, that pagan nations continue to the present time
to make their gods of gold, and that there is a hankering after it
among the Hebrew as well as Christian nations, althougfi it can
not be utilized by the latter for any other purpose than ornaments, and as an article of commerce that finds ready purchasers
among the pagan nations for the purpose of making their gods.
Statesmen, continue to assert, that gold was deposited in the
earth by the Almighty, to be used as a standard of, value, the
measure of value, and the representative of value; and that the
value of gold is determined by the amount of labor expended in
producing it. This is logically true in regard to all other mineral
deposits, such as iron, copper, lead, tin, zinc, coal, salt, and all else
that can be utilized; but if applied to the production of gold, the
logic will not hang together, as is shown by facts. Twenty laborers have searched months and years for gold, and did not produce
an amount sufficient to support one man: on the other hand, we read
of one man who, with no other tools than a common jack-knife,
hooked out 200 dollars worth of gold daily for months; another
obtained from one ton of quartz 42,000 dollars of value in gold,
the cost of labor not exceeding that of quarrying a ton of limestone; three others, at Virginia City, have taken to themselves
each 390,000 dollars per month of gold, being the net profits of
their mines after deducting all expenses. If labor is to be taken
as a standard of value (as it undoubtedly is), then gold can not
be a fair measure of value. And it is no more a legal tender
without the token of sovereignty upon it than cast steel, which
never varies in price so much as gold.
When the Supreme Court of the United States, in 1873, decided
that the greenbacks issued pursuant to the act of the 25th of
February, 1862, were a valid legal tender, the act of March, 1869,
was before the court; but no notice was taken of it. It had no
meaning as viewed by the court; it is inoperative.
The court decided that greenbacks are not only the equivalent
of coin, but the equivalent of gold coin.
The court could make no mistake as to the legality of the act of
February 25, 1862; the intention of the statesmen who enacted




23
that law, had been proclaimed at the time of its passage by Thaddeus
Stevens and others, and again reiterated by Senators Morton and
Sherman on the stump and in newspapers during the canvass in
1868, " That by the terms of the law and the contract, the 5-20
bonds are payable in greenbacks at our own treasury." They
went so far as to denounce a party who would put any other construction upon the law or the contract, as an enemy of his country.
Thus the matter stood upon the statute book and the Supreme
Court records. No profane hand was raised against the law or
the contract until in January, 1870, the Chairman of the Finance
Committee of the Senate introduced a bill that became a law in
July of that year, which was meant and intended to have the effect
of abrogating the contract that had been executed and duly
recorded between the obligors and the obligees in the 5-20 bonds,
and to repeal the law authorizing the issue of greenbacks in which
the bonds were to be paid; not only so, but intended to transfer
our national debt outside the jurisdiction and control of our government and place the control and management of our money
power in the hands of aliens who have proved to be hostile to our
form of government; thus abdicating our money power (a power,
says Macaulay, that rules the world) by transferring its control to
foreign nations-by changing our debt from a home debt to a
foreign debt.
The bill proposing to change the law and contract upon which
the 5-20 bonds are based, was introduced in the latter part of
January, 1870, all of a sudden. Nobody ever heard of it outside
the Senate until it appeared in the report of proceedings the morning after its introduction.
The title of the bill was as follows: "An act to authorize the
funding and consolidation of the national debt, to extend banking
facilities and establish specie payment."
The bill directed the Secretary of the Treasury and Comptroller
of the Currency to prepare bonds, made payable by the government, to the amount of twelve hundred million of dollars, in
Hamburg, Amsterdam, Frankford, London and other European
cities, principal- and interest, in the gold coin of those countries,
which is eight to nine per cent. above our eagles. The plan proposed that syndicate commissioners be appointed, with clerks and
experts, to travel over Europe with those bonds, expenses and




24
commissions to be paid, sell the bonds for gold coin, bring it to
this country, and pay off the 5-20 bonds in gold coin. The
holders of the 5-20 bonds never prayed for the passage of such a
law. It was a scheme invented by the money brokers of London
and New York, to be engineered through the Congress by Jay
Cooke and Hugh McCullough.
The real intent of the money dealers was to exchange the bonds
payable in European cities in gold coin, for the 5-20 bonds payable at our treasury in greenbacks, thereby making our home debt
a foreign debt.
When the bill was introduced in January, 1870, there was a
committee of the National Labor Reform Organization in session
at the city of Washington-a committee appointed by delegates
that assembled in a National Convention, in the city of Philadelphia, in August, 1869. It was a National Convention, represented
by delegates sent there to represent in that convention a majority
of all the electoral people of all the States. The convention adjourned over to assemble again in the city of Cincinnati, August,
1870. A committee was appointed by the Philadelphia Convention to prepare a report upon the financial question, for the consideration of the Cincinnati Convention.
When the committee learned the full purport of the funding
scheme proposed in the Senate, they transmitted to the Senate,
and had published in the newspapers, a protest, of which the following is a copy:
PROCLAMATION  No. 1.
SHERMAN'S FUNDING BILL.
WASHINGTON, D. C., Feb. 5th, 1870.
To the Working-men of the United States:
We, the undersigned,.official representatives of the National
Labor Union, composing upwards of four million of voters, and in
connection with whom are involved the interests of twenty-five million of the American people, invoke your attention to a bill pending
in Congress, entitled " An act to authorize the funding and consolidation of the National debt; to extend banking facilities and establish specie payment," introduced by Senator Sherman. This
bill converts the currency loan made to the government at the
rate of fifty-five cents on the dollar into a gold payment at the




rate of $1.22 on the dollar. *  *  *  It will appear, if that
mode of payment is adopted, there must be collected from the
producing classes, during the lifetime of the bonds, and handed
over to the bondholders in interest, the aggregate sum of over
$3,281,000,000, leaving the principal, $1,200,000,000, unpaid.
This bill is skilfully drafted, and exhibits the outcropping of the
craft. If the draftsman had $1,000,000 for his fee, it could not
be more dexterously fitted for the nefarious purpose. It must
have had its birth outside the walls of the Capitol, for the features
of the money broker are stamped indelibly upon it. But, whoever is its author, we pronounce the bill, in the language currently
used during the rebellion, a public enemy.
Signed by the Committee.
The report of the committee appointed by a National Convention, was published in February, 1870, and unanimously adopted
by the National Convention that assembled at Cincinnati in
August, 1870.  The report and the convention that adopted it,
recommended that the law and contract under which the 5-20
bonds had been issued, should remain as it stood upon the statute
book, and the bonds be paid in accordance with the law and contract, and inasmuch as the time had elapsed and that the government had the right to make a tender that the bonds be paid off,
thereby relieving the labor of the country from a heavy tax to pay
interest.
But notwithstanding the decided action of the convention,
representing the people in their sovereign capacity and embodied
in the protest of their committee upon the financial question of the
nation, the Congress, the agents of the sovereign people, enacted
the Sherman bill into a law that was approved 14th July, 1870.
When the act of July 14th was approved, an additional issue of
six hundred million tokens of the sovereign power, put upon any
substance by a law of Congress, would have enabled the Treasurer
and Comptroller of the Currency to give notice to the holders of
the 5-20 bonds that, upon a day to be fixed, the greenbacks would
be ready and tendered at the paying counter of the bank parlor
in the treasury building. Such notice of being prepared to make
the tender, would from that day have put an end to the debt and
interest, whether the holder of the obligation accepted it or not.
D




26
But the act of July 14th, 1870, requires that the tender be
made in Frankford, Amsterdam, Hamburg, London and other
European cities, not in greenbacks, not in the gold eagles of
America, but in the gold coin of European cities, and no tender is
binding upon the holder of the obligation for a portion of thebonds until after the lapse of forty years.
The holders of the 5-20 bonds did not ask Congress to change
the original contract; they were content, as well they may be, to
let it stand upon the record. Nor did the people, whose labor
pays the bonds, pray for an alteration of the original contract.
The money rings argue that the Congress being the representatives of the sovereign people, are, therefore the sovereign for the
time being. This is true in so far as the representatives of the
sovereign confine their action within the limits of the charter; but
the charter was made by the people who are sovereign by virtue
of an inherent right, and made for the guidance of the agents the'people may appoint to transact their business. But the people
were not made for that charter; they possess inherent sovereign
rights and sovereign powers that are older than the charter, outside and independent of it-rights and powers that they may
exercise whenever the exigencies happen that it is necessary to
provide the means to relieve their necessities. Whenever the
agents of the sovereign transcend their powers as specified in the
charter, the sovereign possesses the right and the power to repudiate the acts of the agent and to declare them to be null and void..
In repudiating the alteration, or attempted alteration, of the
contract to pay the 5-20 bonds, no injustice is done the bondholder
-the original contract'remains upon the record-he had the law
before him upon the statute book when he purchased the bond,
and if any alteration was made, he stands convicted of notice. If
the alteration should turn out to be fraudulent, the bondholder
looses nothing thereby; he having notice, must abide the consequences of the fraud.
It has been contended that Jay Cooke, in whose hands the 5-20's
were placed to be sold (and he to receive a per centum of the
proceeds), published notice that the bonds were payable in gold,
the government ought to pay in gold. But Jay Cooke did not, in
that notice, state all the truth-the government could pay in gold
if it chose to do so, and had the gold. A tender of greenbacks,




27
-however, would be as valid a fulfillment of the obligation as a
tender in gold.
In regard to the bonds issued pursuant to the act of 14th July,
1870, the agents of the sovereign had no power to bind their
principal in contracts entered into with individuals residing outside
the jurisdiction of the sovereign; nor have individuals not within
the jurisdiction of the sovereign any power to enforce such contracts; neither the sovereign under whose jurisdiction the holder
of the bond resides, or their tribunals of justice, can take cognizance of such contracts. On the other hand, if the parties holding
the bonds bring themselves within the jurisdiction of the sovereign
supposed to be bound, they are no better off. The government of
the American nation has sovereign power but has no rights-it
cannot be sued or brought into a court of justice. As to whether
or not the bonds will be paid, is a political and not a judicial question. The sovereign may refer the bondholder to the original
contract upon the record, and he may repudiate the alteration of
that contract and assume the responsibility.
Now, I will briefly refer to the consequences that must result if
that contract is carried into full effect, as provided for in the act,of July, 1870.
Our home debt of 1,200,000 dollars, payable in greenbacks, is
converted into a foreign debt which will amount to, when the
last bonds shall become due, principal and interest, the sum of
$4,480,000,000 (four thousand four hundred and eighty million
of dollars). To this sum is added $10,000,000, appropriated to
pay clerks and traveling expenses of syndicate commissioners.
A board of syndicate commissioners was appointed to travel
over Europe under the pretense of selling the bonds issued under
the act of July, 1870, for gold; transport the gold to America,
and with it take up the 5-20 bonds. But that was not the real
intention. The gold bonds were carried to Europe by the syndicate commissioners, there exchanged for all the 5-20 bonds that
could be found, and for all that could be found at home were exchanged, and the gold bonds deposited for collection in Frankfort,
London and other European cities.
Now, the amount of American labor that will be required to
-produce the gold and transport the same to foreign countries,
sufficient to pay the debt and interest, is a matter that can be




28
readily determined by simple rules of arithmetic. The facts of
history show that the working life of laboring men, after they
arrive at an adult age, averages twenty years, that the net production of the laboring man, after deducting food and shelter and
allowing for sickness and casualties, is fifty dollars per year.
From this data it will require the entire working lives of 4,490,000 laboring men to produce a commodity to be transported to.
foreign countries, there manipulated into the various coins of those
countries. If the labor is distributed amongst the multitude, the
result will be the same, or in other words, that number of American freemen must be employed in feeding other people's children
and impoverishing our own.
The scheme for increasing our public debt from $12,000,000 to
$4,480,000,000, and transferring the control of our money power to
foreign nations, was a masterly stroke of English statesmanship.
But what is to be said of American statesmen. who have allowed
the government to become the debtor of a foreign nation in an
amount impossible for them ever to pay.
That the fact of keeping our public debt outstanding, unpaid,
and transferring its control to other nations has the effect of increasing the tax on all productive industries to an extent that
absorbs more than the net profits, is evidenced by the bankruptcy
of our railroads, the paralyzing of our manufactories, thereby
depriving laborers of the means to provide shelter, increasing the
temptations to vice, filling our almshouses, jails and penitentiaries
with persons driven by necessity to crime, taxing the property
and wealth of the citizen to support those whose necessities demand
charity in a superabundant land.
The facts that I have extracted from the record, facts that
cannot be gainsaid, abundantly show that the high rate of taxation has resulted in inflicting evils upon the productive industries
of the country, that ought no longer to be endured, and I think
the records to which I have referred, abundantly show that we as
a sovereign nation possess power to apply the remedy necessary to
eradicate those evils, that is to say, power to lower the rate of
taxation to a rate that will not exceed the rate of increase in the
national wealth by natural production.
This brings us to the question as to how the power can be
applied so as to produce the results desired.




29
There are two modes in which that power may be applied.
First, the natural and peaceable mode, the ballot; if that fails,
then the bayonet. If it was a question that could only be settled
by using the bayonet, then it would be one of short duration.
In bringing about the reform desired, we have no hostile foe to
encounter. We can make no war upon the money dealer or the
banks for deposits and discount; these both pursue a legitimate
business under the laws. In neither the money lender nor the
banks are vicious persons to be found. The capitalist loans money
to his friend, never to an enemy; so do the banks, and they both
act from patriotic motives. Next to receiving back the loan and
interest, the lender is most pleased to know that he has benefitted
a friend, or afforded facilities in advancing the general development
and wealth of the State.
But the money power of the nation controls the ballot, the press
and the legislature.
If the people whose labor produces all the property and wealth
of the nation can control their legislature, then they are safe, and
can afford to let the money dealers, the banks and the press take
care of themselves. But there is no difficulty in controlling the
press; that belongs to the people whose labor supports it, and
must come to their aid when necessary to promote the common
welfare.
The plan for controlling the legislature is simple, plain and
feasible if carried into practical effect.
When candidates for the next Congress offer themselves to the
caucus or nominating committee there should be a contract prepared for them to sign. They should be required to put themselves in black and white upon the record, stipulating and covenanting that if appointed by a vote of the majority to act as agents
of the people in the next Congress, they will faithfully carry into
effect the will of the majority in regard to supplying the wants of
the treasury.
Those instructions can be embodied in one simple, plain proposition, namely: That they will pass a law, authorizing and directing the Secretary of the Treasury to prepare a sufficient amount
of legal tender tokens of the sovereign power to pay off the entire
outstanding public debt, in accordance with the original contract;
and that public notice be given of the time that a tender can be




30
made. This will stop interest and put an end to the debt, whether
the holders of the government's obligation accept the tender or
not.
I have referred to records which show, that the law of Congress, approved 18th March, 1869, entitled "An act to strengthen
the public credit," is inoperative; and a law, such as here suggested, would render the act of July 14th, 1870, and the Specie
Resumption Act, nugatory, and the bottom would fall out of all
National banks.
By abrogating the act of Congress passed July 14th, 1870, so
greatly increasing the debt, and making it a foreign debt, there
can be no loss to the holder of the bonds exchanged for the 5-20
-no injustice is done to him. The original contract to pay in
greenbacks stands upon the record. The alteration of that contract was a fraud upon the obligors in the contract to pay in
greenbacks at our treasury, of which the holders of the bonds
payable in gold stand convicted of notice. If the government
refuse payment in gold to individuals in foreign countries, that
will not prevent those individuals from presenting their claims for
payment at our treasury, under the original contract.
Under the original contract, the amount of the 5-20 bonds
stands to the credit of the original purchaser, or his legal representative, upon the National ledger; and on presentation of the
bond for which the 5-20 was exchanged, must be taken as prima
facie evidence that the holder is the legal representative in the
original contract.
No charge of bad faith will lie against the parties whose labor
is freely offered to pay the 5-20 bonds according to the contract.
It is now a question solely for the people who assented to the
original contract, and not for the bondholder, to decide for themselves whether or not they will submit to a fraud of which the
holders of the altered bonds had notice.
The people that must pay the bonds, possess the right and the
power to do in the premises as they please. They possess the
power to prevent agents from being appointed to transact the
business of the nation, unless they will give a pledge, in writing,
binding themselves to take the initiatory steps for reducing the
present high rate of taxation, by paying off the public debt in
accordance with the original contract.




31
The people have a just right to demand such a written pledge,
and have the power to refuse an appointment unless the obligation
is signed.
The American republic is the first government, legitimately
established, that successfully ignored the doctrine of the Divine
Right of Kings. And we should be mindful of the farewell warning of Washington, namely-against the insidious wiles of foreign
influence; (I conjure you to believe me, fellow-citizens,) the jealousy of a free people ought to be constantly awake.
Our government having been legitimately established, the law
of nature, which gives us the right to provide for our necessities,
and imposes upon us the care of our preservation as a duty, also
includes the preservation of the government as a duty we -owe to
ourselves and to our children in our day, to our country and
posterity.
TRADE AND COMMERCE.
I have purposely refrained, throughout the argument on the
question of power in the Congress to supply the wants of the
treasury, from mixing that question with collateral questions that
may grow out of the multitudinous uses that the owner of the
legal token may make of it after it has left the treasury and is in
possession of him to whom it rightfully belongs.
As to the uses that may be made of the token after it has left
the treasury, are questions that neither the Congress nor the Secretary of the Treasury have any right to meddle with.
Section 8, Article 3 of the Constitution, states: " Congress shall
have power to regulate commerce with foreign nations, and among
the several States, and with the Indian tribes."
This is a latent power that Congress is never called upon to
exercise unless it becomes necessary to remove obstructions in the
way of free transit in exchanging the productions of one territory
for those of another. Foreign commerce is the same as domestic.
The seas belong to everybody alike, and every nation alike has the
right to protect their own flag.
But commerce, both foreign and domestic, is carried on by individuals in exchanging property and products based on actual
values and not on legal or fictitious values.
For an illustration of this view the properties and values annually produced by the labor of the inhabitants in the Mississippi




32
Valley, including the Ohio, by labor skilled and unskilled, aided by
machinery, is estimated in an amount equal to five hundred million
of dollars; and it is reasonable to assume that in the multitudinous
exchanges of commodities for commodities in the trade and commerce of the valley, not ten per cent., certainly not to exceed 20
per cent. of the amount in money is used.
The records of the clearing house in one of our metropolitan
cities (St. Louis) show that checks to the amount of three and onehalf to four millions of dollars pass through that bureau daily,
and some days the amount has reached, the sum of five millions.
Now, not one of those checks were based upon gold coin, or called
for gold coin, they were based upon the property and wealth of
the maker that labor had produced. When a check is not responded to, the holder falls back on the drawer, and by operation
of law, takes his property to the extent of satisfying the check.
In addition to the amount of checks that pass through the clearing house, there is from one and one-half to two millions that pass
daily through the various banks in the city, making an aggregate
average of five millions daily. These checks are met with other
checks, ad infinitum, and the final result is that the net production is absorbed by taxes.
BANKS.
Banks for the safe deposit of money are as necessary as storehouses and granaries for keeping the surplus provisions, or yards
for storing lumber and other property.
The States, and not the Congress, have the right to grant
charters to local banks.
When public notice is given that individuals or corporations
have established a bank, for the purpose of taking money on
deposit and for loaning money, the question as to the amount the
bank may require the depositor to pay for keeping the money safe,
ready on call, or the amount of interest the bank may pay for the
use of the money, is one that concerns the depositor and the bank
and nobody else.
The deposit is a loan made to the bank, the only security required is a credit of the amount to the' depositor upon the records
of the bank, and copied in a small hand book delivered to the
depositor by the bank.




33
In like manner when one applies to a bank for a loan, the question of the rate of interest is one that only concerns the borrower
and lender.  But if the banks do not have an amount on hand to
meet the demand for loans, as a matter of course, supply and
demand regulate the price as in everything else.
If the bank has 2000 dollars to loan, and lets it to the borrower at four per cent., the net return will be the same as a loan,of 800 dollars at ten per cent.  But the results to the borrower
may be very different. If the person carrying on business can
have the use of 2000 dollars at four per cent,. he may pay the
-interest and continue to make a margin of profit; on the other
hand, if he pays ten per cent. on 800 dollars, the interest will
absorb all. his profits, and finally his capital.
The amount of legal tenders in the treasury, and out of it, is a
-fraction less than fourteen dollars per capita of our population.
If the public debt is paid off, there will be outside of the
treasury a per capita of thirty-five to thirty-eight dollars. This
will increase the deposits in banks and enable them to lower their
rate of interest, and thereby afford greater facilities to commerce
and trade, and to progress in the general development of our
resources-giving employment to all laborers, skilled and unskilled
— and establishing a just standard of distribution of the net
production of labor and capital, thereby removing all cause for
strikes or antagonism  between labor and capital.
There never again can be a monetary system established within
our republic by State banks issuing bills of credit upon a specie,
-or supposed specie basis, as formerly, and as in England, where its
bank, with fifteen million of gold coin in its vault, has issued sixty
million in bills of credit. The bank sinks the interest on the
fifteen million and receives interest on sixty million. So it was in
our country when banks issued $300 to $700 in bills of credit based
-on $100 in specie, and often upon straws. The interest on the
$100 was sunk and interest gathered in on $700-often at usurous
rates. The people will never hereafter submit to a violation of the
10th section of the Constitution, which in express words, forbids
the State to emit bills of credit.
As I have said in the outset, " The necessities of a nation beget
-its attributes"; and the way is now open and clear for the sover-.eign people of America to establish a monetary system to suit
E




34
themselves, based upon the power to execute their own laws. As,.
when the King of England has declared, " This shall be a sovereign," that makes it a sovereign.
In like manner when the sovereign people of republican America
has declared through their Congress, "This token of sovereign
power shall be a legal tender," then it is a legal tender, and the
power exists to. enforce that law like all other laws.
I have endeavored to elaborate the question in hand, solely
from a republican standpoint, without alluding to the monetary
systems in monarchial governments. It is not necessary that our
system  should have any connection with those of monarchial
Europe, because we are a self-supporting, independent nation,
capable by the general development from year to year of our vast,
resources of supporting ourselves with all things needful, and
therefore not obliged to carry on commerce with any European
nation; whilst there is no nation on the continent of Europe capable of supporting their population and progressing unaided by
the advantages they derive from commerce with other nations;
and it now appears that the prediction of Mr. Bazely, Mr. Roebuck, members of the British Parliament in 1868, "that the day
was not far distant when America would supplant England in the
most coveted markets in the world," is being fulfilled. In 1873,
our rolling mills received orders for rails from Liverpool, and we
send our hardware and cutlery to London, and calico to Manchester.
It may be profitable, however, to refer to the masterly statesmanship that the quasi-republic of France has exhibited to the
world in recuperating to her former station amongst the nations
of the earth from the terrible helpless condition which she appeared
to be in, at the close of the war with Germany.
I quote from  the historian of to-day:  "Never before had a
great and powerful nation been so speedily and thoroughly mastered; rarely, if ever, had a brave and proud people been compelled to conclude hostilities with so disastrous results. This
great nation, heretofore one of the most powerful and influential
in Europe, seemed to be on the verge of political ruin. Such was.
France as she appeared before the world some years ago, and
what is her condition to-day?  *   *  her financial condition
is in most respects better than that of any nation in the world.




35
Her waste places have been restored; her industries have been
stimulated into unprecedented activity; her exports largely exceed
her imports, having made her a creditor nation. Gold has been
steadily drawn to her  *  *  *  until the Bank of France holds
in her strong room the enormous sum of three hundred millions
of coin and bullion —(a sum three times greater than the amount
of gold in the Bank of England and in the Treasury of the United
States). France paid her indemnity debt of one billion of dollars
to Germany in two years. It is true that the debt was paid with
borrowed money, but it is also true that the French people were
chiefly the lenders. The French debt, the largest in the world,
more than twice as large as that of the United States, is literally
a home debt.
Now the question arises, and is one of special interest to the
people of the United States: By what means has France been
able to retrieve her credit and recover from her misfortune; what
is the secret of her recuperative power?
The historian comments as follows: The government of the
United States changed the ownership of our national bonds from
our own citizens to foreigners, by substituting gold interest for
currency interest as to the 5-20's, and then created an absentee
landlordism, which is crushing us as its counterpart crushed Ireland. France retained the national debt in their own hands;
retained at home their own resources in men and money, to repair the wrongs of war and turn the balance of trade in their
favor. France has thirty-four dollars per capita; we have thirteen
dollars and fifty cents.
Statistics for 1875 show that France during the year imported
484,569,000 francs in value of manufactured goods, and imports of raw material amounted to 2,246,490,000 francs; food
was imported to the amount of 779,884,000'francs. Total imports amounted to 3,672,266,000 francs; exports amounted to
4,022,162,000 francs.
The happy condition of France is solely attributed to her
monetary system having been established on a correct basis. Her
necessities, caused by the war, like those of the United States,
obliged France to supply her treasury, and following the example
of the United States, she issued tokens of her sovereign power on
paper, differing from the latter, however, in this: The tokens of




sovereign power issued by the government of France upon paper,
is a legal tender alike with that impressed on gold throughout the
realm, and therefore it is that her domestic commerce is carried on
with her legal tender tokens stamped on paper, leaving the gold to
be used in her foreign commerce; and her exports of manufactured
goods largely exceeding her imports, the quantity of her gold is
being continuously augmented until it now exceeds the amount in
the Bank of England and the Treasury of the United States twofold.
The legal tender tokens of the French nation, in the shape of
notes of the Bank of France, will sell in any of our metropolitan
cities, like the notes of the Bank of England, for a premium in
gold equal to the rate of exchange between the countries. But
the notes of the Bank of France are much stronger than the notes
of the Bank of England —the former are based upon the sovereign
power of the government and are a legal tender throughout the
xealm, whilst the latter are not a legal tender nor are they based
upon the sovereignty of the nation, but upon gold supposed to be
in the Bank of England, which is not there, nor has it ever been
there in an amount equal to one-fifth of their bills of credit outstanding.
The legal tender token of sovereign power, issued by the American nation, is stronger than that of England and France combined; and if properly issued, would, like the notes of the Bank
of France, pay a debt in any country that our merchants deal
with.