32D CONG....2D Sess.

or to any citizen. Not to the Government, for it alone manufactures and puts them in circulation. It should, therefore, as a matter of duty, maintain their credit; and as it cannot part with them without receiving their full nominal value, it should always be ready to retake them at that value. It is no hardship, because the Government will receive them at precisely what it will have paid them out. It can, therefore, suffer no loss. It can be no hardship upon the citizen, because, as it is entirely at his option whether he will take them from the Mint or not, he certainly will not take them unless they are worth to him their nominal value, the price at which he receives them. A nominal dollar of these coins must be worth a dollar in gold, for they must be worth the price they will bring, and as no one can get them from the Mint, the sole manufactory, for less, and as the Govment will stand pledged to redeem them at that price, they must always bring it. They must therefore always be worth and pass for a dollar in large or small sums. This we see verified by our three-cent pieces and the Spanish coins now so extensively circulated in the country. No one doubts but that when he receives a dollar in them at their nominal value he is getting the worth of a dollar of gold or silver, because he can get them for no less, and he can readily exchange them for the one or the other. Yet that nominal dollar in three-cent pieces is intrinsically worth, of standard silver, only eighty-three and one third cents, and in the Spanish coins usually in circulation only from eighty to ninety-four cents, according as it is in fips, twelve-and-a-half-cent pieces, or quarters, the depreciation of these Spanish coins by abrasion being from six to twenty per cent.

If, then, the mere necessity and convenience of the community maintain in circulation at their nominal value coins thus intrinsically depreciated, can there be any doubt that one of an intrinsic value of at least an average of twelve per cent. more, issued by and bearing the stamp of our own Government, which will also stand pledged to redeem them, will do so without loss to the citizen? Your copper coin maintains its credit and circulation, though not intrinsically worth seventy per cent. of its nominal value. You need no law making these new coins a legal tender. The creditor will be but too anxious to receive them, as he now is the old worn-out Spanish coins, which there is no law to compel him to take, and, as he now is, our three-cent pieces. Another reason why the Government should receive them in payment is, that, though-as these coins will only be issued from the Mint upon the demand of our citizensthere can be but little danger of an issue beyond their actual wants, yet if, by any possibility, there should be, they will immediately find their way back to the Treasury in the payment of public dues, and thereby be withdrawn from circulation, and the amount reduced to the wants and convenience of the people. They can then never be a drug in the market; can never fall below their nominal value.

So much for this change, and so much for the "principle upon which it is to be made. Every one who has given the least attention to this subject must be satisfied that some alteration in the relative value of our gold and silver coins is necessary, and must be made, or that we shall soon be without any of the latter. The value of coin, like the value of anything else, is in proportion to the cost of its production; or, if gentlemen prefer the expression, in proportion to the supply and demand, which comes to the same thing; for if the amount of labor required to produce an article is lessened, the production is cheapened, and the amount produced, so long as there is a market for it, is increased. We are all aware that within the last few years it has required less labor than formerly to raise gold, whilst the cost of raising silver has remained about the same. The quantity of gold raised has been increased as a Consequence, and it has become cheaper, when compared with silver, or other commercial commodities. Silver, then, when compared to gold, has appreciated in value, not only in our own market, but in the markets of the commercial world.

The same amount of silver bullion will now buy more gold bullion than heretofore; but as it now takes no more gold bullion to make a dollar than before, no man thinks of paying his debts in

Coinage Question-Mr. Dunham.

silver dollars or coins, but he gathers up the
silver coins, exchanges them for gold, and bras
the gold made into dollars, and with them pays
his debts, or, which comes to the same thing, he
exchanges his silver for the amount in gold coins
that the gold bullion, which his silver dollars would
buy, would make, and with them pays his debts,
saving to himself, by the operation, the increased
number of gold dollars which he gets for his sil-
ver. As our coins of gold or silver are regarded in
a foreign market simply as so much bullion as
merchandise, when debts are to be paid in those
markets, those will be taken which will bring the
most there in proportion to what they cost here.
The intrinsic above the nominal value in a single
silver coin, or in a small number, being small, they
pass singly, or in small numbers, as a currency at
their nominal value only; but as in large sums this
difference amounts to considerable, there is a profit
in gathering them into large sums and selling them
as bullion, thereby withdrawing them from cir-
culation. A like interest prevents the holder of
large sums from paying them out as currency.
As the advance received from the exporter by the
person who gathers them up at their nominal value
is clear profit, he can sell them to him at such a ||
price as will enable him to make a handsome profit
by their exportation to a better market. There is,
then, a constant stimulant to gather up every silver
coin, and send it to market as bullion to be ex-
changed for gold, and the result is, the country is
almost devoid of small change for the ordinary
small business transactions, and what we have is
of a depreciated character. This does not injure
your Wall street brokers, who deal by thousands;
they are making a profit by it; but it is a serious
injury to the laboring millions of the country, who
deal in small sums. I am not so much surprised,
therefore, to find the gentleman from the city of
New York [Mr. BROOKS] opposing the measure.

This evil must be remedied; and I know of no
remedy but to make the relative intrinsic value of
gold and silver coins correspond with their relative
nominal value. You must diminish the intrinsic
value of the silver coins, or increase that of the
gold; you must diminish the quantity of silver in
the silver coins, or increase the quantity of gold
in the gold coins. Which shall we do?-which
ought we to do? This we can only determine by
examining the effects of the one and the other; by
whether we should or should not interfere with the
present state of existing contracts; whether we
should legislate for the benefit of the creditor at the
expense of the debtor; for the benefit of the capi-
talist at the expense of labor; whether we shall
use the powers of the Government to advance the
interests of the rich, or to protect the poor?

And first, what will be the effect of increasing the quantity of gold in the gold coins? Our gold coins are a legal tender in payment of debts at their nominal value. If the debtor has, therefore, given his note for a hundred dollars, that is practically a contract to pay the quantity of gold, of the standard fineness, now contained in a hundred dollars of those coins. If you by law increase the quantity of gold in those coins seven per cent.-about what this bill proposes to decrease the silver coins-the debtor must then, to discharge that same debt, pay the quantity of gold contained in one hundred and seven dollars of the present coins-seven dollars more than he contracted to pay. Or, to give a further illustration, suppose I borrow a hundred dollars, and receive it in the present legal gold coins, and gave my note payable ten days after date. This note, if its terms were fully expressed, means that I shall, ten days after date, pay the gold in quantity and fineness contained in one hundred dollars of our present gold coins. Before it comes due you pass a law requiring that the legal gold coins shall contain seven per cent. more gold than now. I have had no occasion to use the money; it has lain in my desk; it has neither gained nor lost anything intrinsically; yet it will not pay off the very note which I gave for it by seven dollars, saving nothing of interest. This, then, is not only violating the validity of contracts, but as the creditors are generally the wealthy cap italists, and the debtors laborers, operators of moderate means, it is using the powers of the Government for the benefit of capital at the expense of labor-of the rich at the expense of the poor.

||

Ho. or REPS.

I know it is said that as gold, by the cheapness of its production, has depreciated in value, therefore by increasing the quantity in the same nominal coins in a like proportion, the creditor only gets the value of his credit notwithstanding he receives a greater quantity. This would be true of those debts contracted before the depreciation of gold commenced, but not of such as have since been contracted, of which is by far the largest proportion of the private debts now in existence; and in reference to those contracted before, the loss must fall somewhere, either upon the creditor or upon the debtor; for the debtor has probably received and saved up the means with which he proposes to pay the debt since the depreciation commenced, and of course received them at the present nominal value, and if he cannot at that nominal value discharge his debt, he must suffer the loss. Is this just? The poor debtor does not undertake to insure the creditor against the silent, but no less important and powerful changes of nature or of natural causes. If the currency had appreciated, the creditor would not have remitted one jot or tittle of what was nominated in his bond. A contract to pay in money is not different, so far as risk is concerned, from a contract to pay wheat or any other commercial commodity. The contractors stipulate the article, the quality and quantity. If it rises in value, the payor loses, and the payee gains. If it falls, then the payee gains, and the pay or loses; each takes his risk. If it was the wheat contained in a hundred bushels instead of the gold in a hundred dollars, and that wheat was at the making of the contract worth one hundred dollars, and before the time of payment wheat should become scarce, and worth twenty per cent. more in price, would the debtor expect to pay or the creditor to receive any the less quantity; or if it should depreciate in value, would the one expect to pay, or the other to receive any the less? Each has taken his risk and must abide the consequences. Or would gentlemen throw the entire risk upon the poor laboring debtor, so that if it rises the creditor gains; if it falls the debtor must lose? This would be the effect. There would be no reciprocity.

Besides, sir, what shall the Government do? It has stamped and put into circulation these various gold coins at their nominal value. Shall it now repudiate its own currency, and refuse to receive it at the price at which it was issued? Shall those who happen to have the present coin on hand at the time of the change suffer the loss, or will gentlemen vote out of the Treasury a fund which will enable the Government to receive these coins at their nominal value, and replace them with those of a greater intrinsic value? This will still throw the burden upon the producing, the tax-paying people. On the other hand, do any of these evil consequences follow the change of the silver coins proposed by this bill? Not at all; for as our gold and silver coins are both legal tenders in payment of debts at their nominal value, the debtor has now the right to pay in gold at such value, which the creditor is bound to receive in discharge of his dues. This being the case, the debtor, although he may tender silver if he chooses, which the creditor must receive at its nominal value, yet as he can exchange that silver for a larger nominal amount in gold, which his creditor must also take, no debtor will pay in silver at its nominal value. This change, therefore, of the silver coins, does not injure the creditor, especially as we do not propose to make the new coins a legal tender in payment of debts, leaving it at the option of the creditor to receive them or not. He, of course, will not receive them unless they will be of as much value to him as the only present practical legal tender, gold, because he may still insist upon the gold. If, then, he does receive them it will be because they will answer his purpose as well, and be therefore of as much value to him as the gold. He then can suffer no loss. It will be no especial benefit to the holder of silver, because he may now sell his silver for gold in the market at its increased market value, and as he will not be permitted to take it to the Mint to be coined into these new coins-for they will only be made out of bullion purchased in the market for the Mint, under the direction of the Treasury-he can still only get for his silver the amount of gold it will bring in market.

This bill will not enhance the value of the pres

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

ent silver coins. They have already been enhanced, when compared with gold, by natural causes. It neither increases nor decreases their value. It will leave that value as it is, to be regulated by the market, but it provides for making new coins for the convenience of the people, whose nominal value shall correspond somewhat to their real value, and pass currently at that nominal value by tale. It does not change the value of any thing, but it gives new coins, with their actual intrinsic value marked upon them, which is not now the case with the present silver coins.

I know, Mr. Speaker, we are told if we will only wait patiently, this thing will soon regulate itself, and that the two metals will soon return to their former comparative value. I think those who thus content themselves have but little heeded the lessons of the past, and as little attended to the prospects of the future. They have but little studied the cause which has produced the difficulty, or they would see that it still continues, and to all human probability must continue with an increasing power. The cause, as I have before stated, is the cheap production of gold. The value of a thing where the production is unlimited, is in proportion to the labor required to produce and get it to market, compared to the labor required to produce other commercial commodities which are ex hanged for it.

This is proved by the state of things existing in California and Australia, where the effect of the small amount of labor required to produce gold is directly seen by the increased quantity necessarily given in exchange for every other commodity produced by labor-in the increased quantity which has to be given for labor itself in other pursuits. Why? Because if labor in other pursuits did not command about the quantity of gold which that same labor applied directly to raising the gold would, it would immediately be withdrawn from those other pursuits and directed to raising the gold. Therefore, as much less labor is required now to produce gold than before the discovery of those mines, labor has been attracted to its production, the supply has been vastly increased, and the value, when compared with other articles, diminished. If the production of these new mines should now cease, the present supply of gold would not be diminished; and as before their discovery the production of gold kept pace with that of silver, there is no reason why the present relative value of the two metals should not be maintained, at least for some time to come. The evil which we now endure would still continue and would need a remedy; but so far from the supply from these mines ceasing, there is every prospect, as before observed, of its continuing in an increasing ratio. On the other hand, what have we to look to for the increase of silver? Nothing, except that quicksilver is a little cheaper from the discovery of new mines, the productions of which are not subject to the monopoly which has controlled that article heretofore, and some little improvements, perhaps, in the machinery with which the silver mines are to be drained and worked. So far, then, from the present evil remedying itself, it must be greatly augmented.

The Coinage Question-Mr. Dunham.

inal value, but it sells as a commodity at its market
price. This was the case with gold before the
act of 1834; it is now the case with silver. Gen-
tlemen talk about a double standard of gold and
silver as a thing that exists, and that we pro-
posed to change. We have had but a single stand-
ard for the last three or four years. That has
been, and now is, gold. We propose to let it
remain so, and to adapt silver to it, to regulate it
by it. This is eminently proper. Gold is the
production of our own country; silver is not. Let
us use our own productions, and, so far as that
use can, increase its value. Why should we leave
our own to use the productions of a foreign soil,
when we can gain nothing by so doing?

Another important provision of this bill is, that
hereafter the Government shall make a charge of
one half of one per cent. for coinage at the Mint,
to defray the actual expenses. The bill also pro-
vides that the depositor may, at his option, have
his gold or silver cast into bars or ingots, or formed
into disks of standard or pure metal, of one, two,
three, five, or ten ounces, and upwards, with the
weight and fineness stamped upon them, for which
the charge shall not exceed the actual cost of man-
ufacture. This is what is usually, though not
very properly, denominated a seigniorage.

Mr. BROOKS. 'I do not intend to interrupt the gentleman, but would ask what he designs to do with this bill when he has finished his speech? If he proposes to put it on its passage, it will be necessary to make some inquiries as he goes along.

Mr. DUNHAM. I am ready to answer any inquiry which may be put to me. I intend, at the close of my remarks, to call for the previous question, and leave the House to put the bill on its passage, continue the discussion of it in the House, or to refer it to the Committee of the Whole on the state of the Union, as it may see proper.

Mr. FREEMAN. I will ask the gentleman from Indiana whether he has the least idea of putting a bill of this importance on its passage without any discussion in the House?

Mr. DUNHAM. The question has been before Congress for nearly the whole of two sessions.

Mr. FREEMAN. Before your committee, I suppose.

Mr. DUNHAM. It has been before the Senate, and this particular subject of seigniorage has been discussed upon one side, at any rate, in this House, as the gentleman from New York [Mr. BROOKS] will recollect; and if he does not, I will endeavor to remind him and the House of a speech delivered by him upon it, at the last session.

Mr. BROOKS. With the gentleman's permission, I will state that a proposition for seigniorage was then introduced, and on a vote by yeas and nays received only fifty votes in the affirmative.

Mr. DUNHAM. I am happy the gentleman has reminded me of that fact; I will endeavor to give the gentleman some reasons why it then received so little favor here. It will be recollected that the gentleman made a speech against it, upon an occasion which allowed no opportunity to reply. I will now endeavor to satisfy the House that his argaments were founded in fallacy, and that he was much mistaken in his facts.

Ho. OF REPS.

rior minds who cannot grasp so great a question as quickly as the committee to which he belongs. We should have an opportunity to examine.

Mr. DUNHAM. Tam obliged to the gentleman for his compliment. There are some gentlemen who; from their manner at least, think they understand these questions as well as the Committee on Ways and Means. I do not want to force the House to anything, and if there be any general objection to the call for the previous question, I shall not make it. I designed giving the House the opportunity to pass this bill, or to refer it, which will be to defeat it, as to it seemed best. I am sure there is nothing unfair or improper in that.

But I wish to reply to one remark of the gentleman right here. I repeat, we do not change the whole present silver currency of the country. We do not depreciate it. We do not propose to change its value in any way. We do not propose to recoin the whole silver coin of the country. We propose to leave the existing coin where it now is; where it has been for at least the last three years; that is, leave it to sell in the market for its value as merchantable bullion. We propose to buy as much of this merchantable bullion, at its actual market value, as may be necessary, and out of it to make and put in circulation, for the convenience of those who want it, a new coin, of the same denominations, to be sure, but of a different weight and value, the stamp upon which shall truly indicate its value.

Mr. MILLSON. I wish to make a suggestion to the gentleman from Indiana, which I trust will meet with his approval, as I doubt not it will meet with the concurrence of the House. This is really. a very important bill, and I am sure the gentleman himself would not desire the House should pass on it without the opportunity for mature examination. I merely suggest to the gentleman that, instead of terminating the debate and forcing the House to a vote, he will allow the bill, by general consent, to be referred to the Committee of the Whole. Then he may move a reconsideration of that vote, which he may call up to-morrow, and thereby make the bill the first one in order for discussion, and give the House an opportunity of examining in print the amendments which have been proposed to the bill by the Committee on Ways and Means, as well as those submitted by the gentleman himself.

Mr. DUNHAM. I have remedied the whole difficulty. I have already made a motion which will keep this bill before the House. I have no desire, I repeat again, to force this bill to a vote in the House; and I say again, if there is any general objection to my calling the previous question, I will not do it. Certainly, the House have it in their power to vote down the call for the previous question, or not. I hope that gentlemen will not further interrupt me, until I get through with the general remarks which I wish to make in explanation of this bill, and then I am willing to answer any question which may be put.

To return to the question, I repeat, sir, we propose to impose a charge or seigniorage upon the coinage of gold and silver, to cover the actual expense of the coinage, instead of defraying that expense, as heretofore, out of the public Treasury. This is a very important provision, and notwithstanding the gentleman tells me there was at the last session a vote of fifty only in favor of it, I trust gentlemen will give it their careful considgeneration, and that it will in consequence meet with much more favor at this time. What do we propose?

Mr. FREEMAN. As the gentleman designs putting this bill on its passage by calling for the previous question, I desire to propound an inquiry to him. I consider any change in the metallic currency of the country would interfere greatly with the interests of the people. Now, the tleman has stated that gold is now the standard of value in this country, and that silver was much more valuable than gold, and, therefore, I take it, not the standard of value.

Another objection urged against this proposed change is, that it gives us a standard of currency of gold only. We sometimes become attached to old forms and usages, and obstinately insist upon continuing them, without considering the reasons for their adoption, or the propriety of their continuance. What advantage is to be obtained by a standard of the two metals, which is not as well, if not much better, attained by a single standard, I am unable to perceive; whilst there are very great disadvantages resulting from it, as the experience of every nation which has attempted to maintain it has proved. The constant, though sometimess low change in the relative values of the two metals has always resulted in great inconveni-preciate the silver currency of the country. Every ence, and frequently in great loss to the people. Wherever the experiment of a standard of a single metal has been tried, it has proved eminently successful. Indeed, it is utterly impossible that you should long at a time maintain a double standard. The one or the other will appreciate in value when compared with the other. It will then command a premium when exchanged for that other; when it ceases to be a currency and becomes merchandise. It ceases to circulate as money at its nom

Mr DUNHAM. Yes, sir; precisely.
Mr. FREEMAN. But in order to bring silver
down to the standard of value, he proposes to de-
member of the House will see that that is a very
important change, and one the people of this coun-
try will not willingly submit to. The question of
a change in the value of existing American coin,
is not one, however much it may be discussed in
this House, which has been assented to by the
voice of the people of the United States. I hope
the gentleman will not undertake to cut off dis-
cussion on this subject. However well-informed
he may be, he should recollect that there are infe-

Mr. BROOKS. Let me correct the gentleman in point of fact. He proposes to levy only the actual expenses of the coinage. The amount of coinage at the Philadelphia Mint was, last year, about $50,000,000. One half of one per cent. seigniorage will be $250,000 annually. The expenses of the Mint at Philadelphia, as I stated and proved the other day, are now nearly obtained out of the depositors, because the Mint, in the estimates, demands $250,000 as the expenses for maintaining itself, and says, at the same time, that it only wants only $48,000 out of the public Treasury, leaving about $200,000 to come out of the public. Now, this bill proposes to add $250,000 more, to come out of the depositors, making $410,000.

Mr. DUNHAM. The gentleman has fallen

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

into an error; in this, that he has taken the appro-
priation for the Mint at Philadelphia alone as the
appropriation for the whole Mint establishment-
the Mint at Philadelphia and all the branches. In
discussing this question of seigniorage, I propose
first to inquire what coinage is, its object, and
effect? I apprehend that much of the opposition
which exists to the charge of seigniorage results
from the want of a proper understanding of the
nature, purposes, and effects of coining. Coining
does not fix or control the value of the currency.
It is a simple manufacture of the metals into pieces
of a convenient form and size, and marking upon
each its respective quality and quantity. For in-
stance, when we see an American silver dollar,
we know by the stamp upon it that it has been
examined and tested by the proper officers, and
that it contains four hundred and twelve and a
half grains of silver nine tenths fine. When we
see a gold dollar, we know in the same way that
it contains twenty-five and eight tenths grains of
gold of the same fineness of silver, (nine tenths.)
This does not fix its value, but it simply marks
quality and quantity, for the convenience of those
who have occasion to receive or pay it, and saves
them the trouble of having to examine its quality,
or weigh it to ascertain its quantity. The value
is then known by the market, and it is paid and
received accordingly.

The law fixes the quality and quantity of metal
in our coins, and when parties do not themselves
in their contracts stipulate the quantity and fine-
ness of these metals, which are to be paid and re-
ceived, which they may always do, but stipulate
the name and number of the coins, the law sup-
plies the hiatus by presuming that the parties mu-
tually referred to the law, made it a part of their
contract, and meant the quality and quantity of
the metal contained in the stipulated name and
number of coins. Thus, when one agrees to pay
and the other to receive a hundred dollars, the full
terms of the contract, as construed by the law,
are to pay and receive the number of grains of
gold or silver of the legal standard (nine tenths
fine) contained in one hundred dollars. This be-
ing the case, who ought to pay the expense of the
coinage, of this manufacture? Should not those
who are benefited by it, and in proportion to the
benefit they receive? Will any gentleman tell me
why a man who only receives and pays out one
hundred dollars of this coin in the course of a year
should pay as much and perhaps more of the ex-
penses of maintaining this Mint than the one who
may handle ten thousand or ten millions? And
yet this may be the case so long as we raise our
revenues by a tariff, and the expense of the Mint
is paid out of the Treasury. If we charge upon
the coinage a seigniorage sufficient to defray that
expense, we make those who have the benefit of
the manufacture pay the expenses of it.

When you change bullion into coin, into a form
which you may more conveniently use, it is just as
much manufactured as if you had manufactured
it into jewelry. He who has the benefit of the
manufacture should pay the expenses in one case
as much as in the other. When the bullion mer-
chant takes his gold or silver bullion to the Mint,
and has it manufactured into coin, that coin is
worth just as much more than the bullion as the
labor is worth which has been expended in its
manufacture, and consequently he should pay for
that labor. It is for his convenience when he
comes to pay it out to others. It saves him the
time and labor which would otherwise have been
required to weigh it. It saves him the time, labor,
and annoyance which it would have taken to
ascertain and agree upon its fineness. It saves
all dispute as to quantity or quality. This is
worth more than the cost of manufacture. It
makes his commodity worth that much more. He
can, therefore, afford to pay for it, and he ought
to pay for it. When he parts with it, it will bring
him that much more; for as the person who will
receive it will have all the convenience of the manu-
facture, he will allow for its enhanced value. The
labor employed in the manufacture becomes incor-
porated into the article as much as the raw material,
and like it contributes to its intrinsic value, and like
it passes from hand to hand in its circulation.
There can be no loss of the seigniorage so long as
the coin remains, for whoever possesses that has
the benefit and value of the manufacture, and has
NEW SERIES.-No. 13.

The Coinage Question-Mr. Dunham.

allowed in receiving it for the enhancement of
value which that manufacture caused. It can only
be lost when the coin, by accident or design, skall
(if I may use the expression) and lost to him who
be reduced to bullion again, and this labor evolved
should be so unfortunate as to meet with accident,
or so stupid as to conceive the design.

HO. OF REPS.

193

leaving no traces of its having passed through our and the frequency of the exchange of that wealth, dominions other than an empty Treasury, and the profits of Wall street brokers, ship-owners, insurwell at once pay these profits out of the Treasury? ance and express companies? Might we not as

in a speech which he made a few months ago, The gentleman from New York, [Mr. BROOKS,] talked most learnedly about this seigniorage being a age. Indeed, he talked so very learnedly about long to the Grand Seignior, because it is seignior"relic of feudality." feudalities and feudalisms, that I almost imagined He said that it ought to bethat he was himself a relic of those ancient times when men talked most flippantly about that which they least understood. Does he not know, does not hap-something very different from what it does as used this House know, that seigniorage then meant in this bill? Then it was a tax upon the coinage to replenish the treasury of the feudal lord; here it means simply a charge, not for a revenue, but for the actual expenses of the manufacture of the coin. The gentleman seemed to me to under-estimate very much the intelligence of the House, when he sought to appeal to your prejudices, by talking about such a charge as being a relic of the feudal adopting it, though it might be ever so proper and times of antiquity, in order to deter you from judicious in itself.

It is possible that coin may be remelted into bul-
charge for coinage may have been exacted; but
lion without loss to the holder, notwithstanding a
gold is limited, and the demand for it for other
this can only happen when the production of
purposes than currency is greater than the need of
it for currency; and then the holder of the coins can
suffer no loss, as the bullion in them will be worth
as much for those other purposes, as the coin is
worth for circulation. But so long as the pro-
duction of the metal is unlimited this cannot
pen, as the demand for those other purposes will
be met with the increased production of the raw
material. Impose a charge for coinage, then, equal
to its cost, and there can scarcely be an over coin-
age, as no one will ordinarily have an article fab-
ricated unless its value when manufactured is equal
of manufacturing. There can be no danger of a
to the value of the raw material added to the cost
short supply, because so long as the article is
worth this, it will be made. Impose this charge,
coinage at such an enormous expense to the Gov-
and you at once put a stop to our present immense
ernment, induced and fostered by our free system,
merely that the coin may be put into boxes and
the melting pots of Europe. When an hundred
sacks at the Mint and sent without emptying to
ounces of coin has cost and is worth as much
more than an hundred ounces of bullion as it has
be remelted into bullion.
cost to make it into coin, that coin will no longer

We are coining over fifty millions a year. Who
is so simple as to suppose that this is for circula-
tion among our own citizens? Who so simple
as to believe that even the largest portion of it is
now in the country? Who does not know that
we have been defraying the expense of this im-
mense coinage for the convenience and profit of
New York brokers? Is it not time to put a stop
profits of this coinage should pay the expense?
to this? Is it not time that those who derive the

FEBRUARY 2, 1853.

The bill being again under consideration-time I have left? Mr. DUNHAM. I wish to inquire how much

The SPEAKER. About fifteen minutes, according to the recollection of the Chair.

Mr. DUNHAM. I am sorry it is so short, and I will endeavor to condense my remarks as much as possible.

Mr. Speaker, the first thing to which I wish to call attention this morning, is a matter to which the gentleman from New York [Mr. BROOKS] aldid not require one half of one per cent. seigniorluded on yesterday. His statement was, that we age to pay the expenses of the Mint, and stated the fact that the Mint at Philadelphia only asked an appropriation of $48,000 out of the Treasury addition to the profits it now derives from coinage. to defray its expenses for the next fiscal year, in priation out of the Treasury of $48,000 for the next It is very true that that Mint only asks an approfiscal year; yet its whole expenses will be considerably more than that. For instance, during the past especial attention of the House-there have been year-and it is a matter to which I wish to call the coined at Philadelphia 18,663,500 three-cent coins, tionate weight to our other silver coins, and are making $559,905; as these coins are of the proporsandths fine, instead of nine hundred, made of metal only seven hundred and fifty thoustandard, their nominal is twenty per cent. above their intrinsic value, or in other words, they are actthe proper ually worth but two and a half cents each. There

But, sir, we are told that the Government motherefore, bear the expense. That must be a cunopolizes and controls the coinage, and should, rious monopoly where the monopolizer pays all the expense, and those upon whom it operates have all the profit. The Government forces no man to bring his raw material to the Mint to be coined. He may bring it or not, as he pleases; he will not bring it unless it is to his interest. If it, but it does not prohibit him from putting his he brings it, the Government puts its stamp upon own upon it and selling it, or from having it manufactured into plate or jewelry. The Government stamp may increase its value, but it cannot diminish or limit it, for we see silver with that stamp upon it selling above the stamped price. The law says that his creditors shall take this coin in pay-fore, as silver is received at the Mint at its proper shall receive no other. It says that they shall take ment of their debts, but it does not say that they it at the value marked upon it; it does not say they shall allow no more for it. It may, therefore, be to his advantage to have his bullion manufactured Why, then, should the Government coin it free any into coin, but it cannot be to his disadvantage. jewelry? more, I repeat, than it should make it into plate or

But we are told it is for the general good of the
people that there should be plenty of coin; there-
fore the Government should pay for the manufac-
ture. So it is that there should be plenty of iron,
manufacture also, or shall those pay who use them,
flour, and salt. Shall the Government pay for their
that have the benefit of them? And if because it
is useful to have an abundance of gold coin, the
expense of the manufacture should be paid out of
the country to be coined, why should not the freight
the Treasury, so as to encourage gold to come into
from California and Australia be also paid out of
the Treasury? Why should we not pay a pre-
dug at public expense? And all to what good, when
mium for its production? Nay, why not have it
the irresistible laws of trade immediately sweep
nations of the world, in proportion to their wealth
it away, and distribute it among the commercial

paid out by tale at their nominal value, the profit value, and made into these coins, which are then from this source last year was over $100,000. This is what I call a seigniorage, and a very heavy one, refining or parting the metals. These profits go arising from the copper coinage, and a charge for too. There is also a profit of the same character towards defraying the expenses of the Mint.

The estimated profits from the coinage of threehowever, we should change the fineness of that cent pieces, for the next fiscal year, is $70,000; if, ought, by all means, to do, we must add this coin to the regular standard, which I think we pains to examine, he would have discovered that amount to the $48,000 to be appropriated out of the Treasury; and if the gentleman had taken the this sum was asked upon the estimate that there would remain, unexpended, of the present year's means, to commence the next, $38,000, which must also be added, making, in all, $156,000, to come out of the Treasury for Philadelphia alone. pieces, there will still be less demand for them, If we pass this bill making these new coins, and do not change the standard of the three-cent But, sir, this bill does not propose to apply the and hence less profit from their manufacture. revenues from this seigniorage entirely to the

32D CONG.....2D SESS.

expe

Delay of Public Business—Mr. Houston, of Alabama.

enses of that particular Mint or branch at which they are raised. It will make them a common fund, out of which the expenses of the coinage at the Mint, and all of the branches, are to be defrayed, irrespective of the place of collection. Now, sir, we know that it will cost a larger per cent. to coin money in California, where provision has already been made for a branch Mint, than at Philadelphia, as it now does at the branches at New Orleans, Dahlonega, and Charlotte. Whilst it costs less than one half of one per cent. at Philadelphia, it costs about three per cent. at Dahlonega and Charlotte. And I will suggest here, that the sooner we abolish those two, the better for the Treasury and the country. We are continuing them at a large annual expense, when neither of them coins in a whole year as much as the Mint at Philadelphia does in two days. They ought to be abolished at once.

The ordinary expenses of the Mint at Philadelphia for the fiscal year '51-52 was $271,213 95, of which $75,000 was appropriated out of the Treasury, and the remainder was obtained from its profits or reductions, of which, as before stated, over one hundred thousand dollars were received from the coinage of three-cent pieces. The amount expended out of the Treasury at the Dahlonega branch, was $10,800; at the Charlotte branch $10,615, and at the New Orleans branch about $98,000. If we abolish the three-cent profits, the amount to be met during the next fiscal year out of the Treasury or by seigniorage, for ordinary expenses, according to the estimates of the Treasury Department, will be, for Philadelphia $156,000; for Dahlonega $11,000; for Charlotte $11,600; for New Orleans $121,000; making the whole amount of expenditures to be met from the Treasury or by seigniorage $299,600. I presume it is known to the House that three-cent and cent coins are only made at Philadelphia.

Now, sir, the coinage for the calendar year 1852 was:

...

At Philadelphia..
At New Orleans...
At Charlotte ....
At Dahlonega.

Total.......

.$52,403,669

4,622,000
396,739
473,815

.$57,896,218

A seigniorage of one half of one per cent. would be $289,481 09. So that supposing the future rate of coinage to continue equal to that of the past year, the gentleman from New York and the House will see, that if you hereafter make your three-cent pieces of standard metal, the seignforage proposed by this bill is not exorbitant, and will not defray the actual expenses of the coinage, much less yield a profit to the Treasury. It is true if this bill shall pass, so as to authorize this proposed new silver coinage, an income by way of profits will, for two or three years, be derived from that, in addition to this seigniorage, but this will not long continue. The expenses of the California Mint will also have to be added, when it shall be put into operation.

There is another large loss to the Government from the present system of coinage. The bullion fund kept at the Mint for the convenience of depositors is about $6,000,000. This fund is to enable the Mint to receive the bullion of the depositor, assay it, and ascertain its value, and at once pay him for it in coin, which is usually done in a few hours, thus saving him from delay and loss of interest. The interest on this fund alone is a loss to the Government, for the benefit of the depositors, of $360,000, for which no charge is now made, nor is proposed to be made by this bill.

Sir, I wish, before leaving this subject, to again call the attention of the House to the enormous coinage of these depreciated three-cent piecesover half a million of dollars in a single year. Why, sir, if we do not soon make some change in our other silver coins, the whole silver currency of the country will soon consist of these three-cent coins and the old worn-out clipped Spanish coins, whose intrinsic value is depreciated about twelve per cent.

on an average.

Mr. OLDS. And yet such is the demand for small coin they pass current.

Mr. DUNHAM. Yes, sir; the demand for silver coin for change is so great that they readily pass current, notwithstanding this vast depreciation. Which is the best, I submit, to leave things

SENATE.

worth as much more than the bullion as that cost, will derive a profit. The result will be, that in a few years we shall have an abundant supply of specie currency for the convenience of the country, and a comparatively small coinage will be suffmense coinage at great expense, but a deficiency of specie for circulation.

thus to go on, and compel the people to use these
old, worn-out, depreciated coins, to have the coun-
try filled with these debased three-cent pieces, or
to make a currency of the proper standard, ade-
quate to the wants and conveniences of the people?
The manufacture and circulation of these, three-cient to maintain it, whilst now we have an im-
cent coins should satisfy gentlemen that even a
high seigniorage will not drive the metals from
your Mints, when the business and wants of the
people require them to go there for manufacture,
and that a small reduction of the quantity of metal
in a coin does not prevent its circulation when it
is made up by its convenience. That convenience
causes circulation as well as the intrinsic value.

We are told if we make this charge for coinage we shall drive the productions of our gold mines from our own to the British Mint for coinage. Well, sir, if it must eventually go to the English market, is it not better that it should go there directly, rather than it should be brought this way merely to be stopped here in transitu long enough to be coined, at such immense expense, and then go immediately to that market? If it must go there-if the laws of trade require it to go there, it will go, and it is better to let it go as bullion than as coin, when, as the gentleman from New York himself shows, the impress of our eagle is effaced so soon as it touches British soil. This charge for coinage will send no more gold to England, will not control the laws of trade, will not cause importations or exportations. Gentlemen will find proof of this in silver. We coin silver here free, but in England they charge a seigniorage of some nine per cent. If you take a pound of standard silver to the Mint, they coin it into sixtysix shillings and give back sixty-two shillingskeeping four shillings to pay for the coinage; or, which is in effect the same thing, they buy silver at sixty-two shillings the pound by tale, and coin that pound into sixty-six shillings. You may call it seigniorage, or just what you please, but they make so much by the coinage.

Mr. BROOKS. You said upon gold.

Mr. DUNHAM. Oh, no; you misunderstood me. They buy an ounce of gold at £3 17s. 9d., in Bank of England notes, and they coin that ounce into £3 17s. 10 d., which is one and a half penny, or about three cents seigniorage upon the

ounce.

Mr. BROOKS. Will the gentleman allow me to interrupt him for a moment?

Mr. DUNHAM. I should be glad to do so, but I cannot, for 1 have very little time left. There is also a seigniorage of one and a half per cent. upon the coinage of silver in France, and there is a seigniorage upon the coinage of silver by every other civilized Government, so far as we have any reliable account. Yet we find this silver bullion not coming to the United States where we coin it free; but forcing its way to Europe, or being drawn thither by the wants of commerce and the irresistible laws of trade, to Mints imposing this enormous seigniorage. This shows that seigniorage cannot control the exportation or importation of silver bullion. Every man who at all understands the principles of political economy, must see in a moment, that where property has to be exchanged by means of a circulating medium-where commercial necessities require a circulating medium, there will be the demand for the material which composes, and there will it go.

DELAY OF PUBLIC BUSINESS.

SPEECH OF HON. G. S. HOUSTON,
OF ALABAMA,

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
February 16, 1853,

In reply to Mr. STEPHENS, of Georgia, concerning
the causes of delay in the transaction of the
Public Business.

The CHAIRMAN. The time fixed by the House for the termination of debate on this bill has now arrived, and the gentleman from Alabama, having reported the bill, is, under the rules, entitled to address the committee on it for one hour.

Mr. HOUSTON said: Mr. Chairman, on yesterday when this bill was taken up, it was not my intention to occupy any portion of the hour to which I am entitled under the rules; but the character of the debate which has taken place makes it to some extent necessary that I should make, at least, a brief explanation, and, at the same time, to give, with all proper respect to other gentlemen, my opinion as to the causes of obstruction of the public business.

I regret that the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. STEPHENS] thought it proper for him to make an assault upon the organization of this House. It seemed to me that his remarks did not come legitimately within the range of a proper debate, and so far did he, in my view, travel out of the line of pertinent discussion, that I am almost led to believe he had some other than the ostensible object in view. I did not suppose that the relations between the honorable gentleman and the Speaker, or between him and the committees of the House, were of such a character as to induce so severe a criticism as that in which he has seen fit to indulge. I am willing to admit that I have not discharged my duty to my own entire satisfaction. I take it, we have but few members who have discharged their entire duty. We all have short-comings. The frailties of our nature are such as to render it almost impossible for any of us to come fully up to our sense of duty. The gentleman possibly reaches the standard fixed by himself. If he does, I congratulate his constituents on having a representative here who, at all times, discharges his duty as the representative of their interest in this House.

I desire to say, in the beginning of my remarks, that upon no occasion during this Congress have I made a motion or given a vote for the purpose of delaying business or postponing proper action on any proposition; and for the correctness of this statement, I appeal to the members, as well as to the Journals of this body. I have usually been punctual in my attendance upon the meetings of the Committee on Ways and Means, and also of this House. I have generally voted upon propositions that have arisen, and in everything (I feel that I can properly say) I have faithfully labored to discharge my duty, and to prove myself worthy of the trust which has been confided to me by my constituents and by this House.

Mr. Chairman, I hope I may be excused for recurring very briefly to the action of this Congress. At the first session, after the formation of committees, every member knows, and none better than the gentleman from Georgia, that the public

The gentleman says that where the bullion of the world goes, there will go the commerce of the world; and he seems to infer that the gold takes with it the commerce. But is not that a most absurd proposition? Does not the bullion go where the commerce exists, and where it requires that bullion for a circulating medium for the convenience and necessity of that commerce? The gentleman takes the cause for the effect. This seigniorage will have only this influence upon the export-printing (necessary to enable committees to invesation and importation of gold and silver: it will induce those who desire to make payments in Europe to make them in bullion; or, if made in coin, it will tend to cause the reimportation of that coin; for if, as before stated, it is worth as much more than the bullion from which it was made as the cost of manufacturing, he who exports it to a market where it is only recognized as bullion, will lose that much, and he who reimports it from such a market to where it can again be used, and is needed as currency, and therefore where it is again

tigate subjects committed to them) was not executed in due season. The printing of that session is not, up to this period, entirely completed. All of the bills upon which the Committee on Ways and Means could act, in the absence of that printing, were reported to the House within the thirty days prescribed by the rules; and I, as its chairman, was instructed to report to this body, that the reason why some of the bills could not be reported within the prescribed time, was, that we could not examine the various items which they