to the mode now--
twelve years after the close of the war--still leaves our paper
money at a discount of five per cent. Until this is removed, there
will be no new enterprises involving great sums, no active industries,
but money will lie idle, and watch and wait the changes that may
be made before we reach the specie standard.
"In 1869, Congress pledged the public faith that the United States
would pay coin for United States notes. Again, in January, 1875,
after more than a year's debate, Congress declared that on and
after the 1st of January, 1879, the United States would pay its
notes in coin.
"The Secretary of the Treasury is expressly required to prepare
for, and maintain, the redemption of all United States notes
presented at the treasury on and after that date, and for that
purpose he is authorized to use all the surplus revenues, and to
sell bonds of the United States bearing four, four and a half, and
five per cent. interest, at par in coin. It is this law, called
the resumption act, now so much discussed in the papers, that
imposes upon the office I hold most difficult and important duties,
and without replying to any attacks made upon me, I am anxious to
convey to you personally, what I have done, and what I must do, in
obedience to the provisions of this act. It is said that the law
is defective, but, if the great object and policy of the law is
right, the machinery of the law could easily be changed by Congress.
That resumption can be secured, and ought to be secured, under this
law, it will be my purpose to show you, and I shall not hesitate
to point out such defects in the law as have occurred to me in its
execution.
"There are two modes of resumption; one is to diminish the amount
of notes to be redeemed, which mode is commonly called a contraction
of the currency; the other is to accumulate coin in the treasury,
to enable the secretary to maintain the notes at par."
Objection had been made that under the first mode resumption would
be a process of converting a non-interest bearing note into an
interest bearing note, and that was true, but what right had we,
as a nation, or had any bank, or individual, to force in to
circulation, as money, its note upon which it paid no interest?
Why ought not anyone who issued a promise to pay on demand be made
to pay it when demanded, or pay interest thereafter? What right
had he, in law or justice, to insist upon maintaining in circulation
his note, w
|