bonds in silver coin, the little
benefit from that process would be greatly over-balanced by the
injurious effect of such payments if made or proposed against the
honest convictions of the public creditors."

Secretary Sherman, in his annual report at the same time, said that in
the work of refunding he had informed his associates in an official
letter that "as the Government exacts in payment for bonds their full
face value in coin, it is not anticipated that any future legislation
of Congress or any action of any Department of the Government will
sanction or tolerate the redemption of the principal of these bonds,
or the payments of the interest thereon, in coin of less value than
the coin authorized by law at the time of their issue,--being gold
coin." He earnestly urged Congress to give its sanction to this
assurance.

These official utterances were put forward in the heat of the general
discussion, and fell upon the ears of persons already engaged on one
side of the other of the earnest controversy in regard to the coinage
of silver. Congress was at once called upon from an unexpected
source to make a declaration hostile in its aim and purpose to the
policy advocated both by the Head of the Nation and its chief
financial officer. In direct hostility to the recommendations of an
Ohio President and an Ohio Secretary of the Treasury, an Ohio senator,
Mr. Stanley Matthews, moved a concurrent resolution in the Senate,
declaring that "all bonds of the United States are payable in silver
dollars of 412-1/2 grains, and that to restore such dollars as a full
legal-tender for that purpose, is not in violation of public faith or
the rights of the creditor." A motion to refer the resolution to the
Committee on the Judiciary was defeated--_ayes_ 19, _noes_ 31. It was
kept before the Senate for immediate consideration and discussion.
The eagerness for debate on the subject is shown by the record.
Thirty-four senators delivered speeches, most of them elaborately
prepared, going over the history of the precious metals, the field
of American legislation, and international practice in money.

The Senate refused to adopt Mr. Conkling's suggestion to make the
resolution _joint_ instead of _concurrent_ and thus require the
signature of the President. Mr. Matthews had framed it so as simply
to evoke an expression by both branches of Congress without sending it
to the Executive, whose opinions had just been made known through hi