RICHARD P. BLAND

(1835-1899)

T IS generally believed that what is known as the "Parting of the Ways" speech, delivered by Richard P. Bland, of Missouri, in the House of Representatives, resulted in what were to many the surprising political changes of the presidential campaign of 1896. Soon after his inauguration in 1893, President Cleveland called an extra session of Congress to repeal the clauses of the Sherman Act which required the purchase and coinage of silver bullion. It was in protesting against the policy suggested by this recommendation that Mr. Bland spoke of the "Parting of the Ways." In copying his speech from the official report, only the argument bearing on abstract questions of political economy has been omitted, while that which explains subsequent political history has been given verbatim.

IT

THE PARTING OF THE WAYS

(Delivered in the House of Representatives, August 11th, 1893)

Is said that history repeats itself, and it seems that the Democratic party is especially the victim of history repeated in some way. When the people intrusted our party in 1884 with the administration of the government, when the Democratic House of Representatives was chosen, I remember full well, and I see around me gentlemen who remember it as I do, for they were here at that time, that before the inauguration of the President of the United States whom we had elected, the emissaries of Wall Street swarmed the lobbies of the House and this capitol, just as they did last winter, demanding-what? Demanding the repeal of the so-called Bland Act.

Precisely the same proceedings that we had here last winter! We were told then that it was the wish of the Executive-Elect that that act be repealed, as we were told the same thing last winter. We were told that it was his opinion and the opinion of his advisers that this country was coming then to the single silver standard. If we did not repeal that law, we were threatened

with a panic, with gold going to a premium. The House was forced to a vote upon that subject before we were adjourned at that time, as we were practically last winter; but it voted the proposition down by a tremendous majority. During the following summer, the New York papers, as they have been this summer, were filled with predictions of gold premiums and panics.

The New York Herald, one of their leading papers, had every day in its columns, "We are still coining the 70 and 75 cent dollar, as a standing advertisement of a panic.

Some time in September or October, before the meeting of Congress, these generous bankers in New York, who say that they control the finances of this country and that what they demand must be acceded, made arrangement with the then Secretary of the Treasury by which they were to withdraw $10,000,000 of subsidiary silver coin and to place in the Treasury of the United States $10,000,000 of gold, in order to secure and maintain gold payments, advertising to all the country that the bankers of New York had come to the relief of the Federal Treasury with $10,000,000 of gold to maintain the public credit.

It was done, Mr. Speaker, to terrorize the people of this country and, if possible, to bring about a panic such as you have to-day, and they know it. And we met in something of a fi nancial panic; not so severe as it is now, however. The whole country was stirred on the silver question. We met in Congress and the question was debated. The result of it all was the refusal to repeal the silver law by over a two-thirds' vote of that House; and the panic vanished. That was the end of it. When they ascertained that the free people of this country, through their representatives, could not be driven as a herd of buffaloes on the Western plains into a panic, to trample themselves and those depending upon them, they ceased.

The howl against silver and the panic stopped. The country continued in its usual prosperity, whatever that may be. We kept on winning these seventy-cent dollars, and no disturbance was made of it, practically, for four years. The Democratic party in the House maintained it against all assaults. But when, unfortunately, our friends on the other side got the power, they enacted another law, repealing the law of 1878.

Now, sir, we are asked here deliberately to repeal that law, and I want to call the attention of my friends on this side of the House, who proclaim themselves to be friends of free coinage

at a reasonable ratio I want to call their attention to this point and to ask them this question: Why do you gentlemen insist that you will repeal this law and send silver down probably fifteen cents an ounce before you fix the ratio? Is that an act friendly to silver? Can any gentleman here fail his free coinage constituency and defend his vote subtracting from the value of silver fifteen cents an ounce before he votes to fix the ratio? I dare him to undertake it. He cannot do it.

It may be convenient to follow the recommendations of the President, but the President does not elect the Members of this House. We do not hold our commissions from the Executive, and I am afraid that if some of us undertake to act here upon that line, when our present commissions expire we shall have all the leisure that we want to study the silver question in peace and quietness at home. For myself I feel it to be a conscientious duty to carry out my convictions on this subject, and I owe it to my constituents to represent what I believe to be their interests. Why are we rushed in here and asked to repeal the only law that sustains, for the moment, at least, the value of silver, before we fix the ratio?

There is no consistency in it; none whatever! The claim is not sincere that the President expects hereafter to recommend bimetallism, for he does not do it in his message, and that claim misrepresents his position. He recommends the reverse. The concluding paragraph of the message means, if it means anything, that after you shall have totally demonetized silver by repealing this Sherman Act, you will be required to go further in the same direction; and I make a prediction here and now, and, my friends, I want you to watch the proceedings of Congress in these coming weeks of this extra session, or of the next regular session, to see whether I am right or not.

My prediction is that in order to carry out the recommendations of that message we shall be called upon to sell bonds to procure gold. For what? To redeem all our pecuniary obligations, according to the very language of that message, in that money which is recognized by the principal nations of the world. Why did not the President say "gold"? We know what his language means. You are asked to load up the Federal Treasury with gold, to redeem every pecuniary obligation to the government with gold, although the standard silver dollar is the identical dollar on which bond obligations were based when they

were issued, because they called for coin of the standard value at the time of their issue, and that was the standard.

But now, I repeat, we shall have to redeem all this bullion, all these Sherman notes in gold; we shall have to sell bonds to get gold to redeem all our greenbacks, all our silver certificates, and we will be compelled to carry our silver dollars as so much dead weight of bullion in the Treasury, so that we might as well dump them into the Potomac. That is what all this means. In other words, every piece of paper money issued in this country to-day, every silver certificate, every greenback, every bond, every Sherman note, is to be redeemed in gold, and we must procure the gold for their redemption.

What, then, are you to do with your silver bullion and with all your silver dollars, together about $500,000,000? They are to be demonetized as a base metal, and you know it. I am talking to intelligent gentlemen here who have read it; who can understand it. Why should you go on, then, to try to deceive yourselves and your constituents on this subject? There is no silver in that message, and gentlemen on the other side will simply do themselves and the subject justice if hereafter, in the course of their debate, they will leave silver out of it, because they are proposing a measure in which there is no consideration whatever for silver.

Mr. Speaker, it may be necessary, and probably is, that I go somewhat into the discussion of the silver question on its merits. I have alluded to these preliminary matters which have been thrown in, and have tried to state that no legislation which we can enact here is going to relieve the panic. This panic has been brought about for the express purpose of repealing this law; there is no question about that. We were threatened last winter with a gold premium. I stated, then, on this floor, and I state now, that there is no gold premium.

On the contrary, I believe the people are now paying a premium for silver and silver certificates. We were urged that we must issue more bonds, that if we did not we were to have a panic. All the newspapers, of the East especially, were advertising a panic if we did not issue bonds. We did not issue them. The Secretary of the Treasury was threatened with a panic if he did not comply with the demand, and he refused. Those who were interested in getting up this panic began to refuse loans, to cramp, to draw in currency. Many of the banks which had been

engaged in booming real estate, or in other questionable transactions, and were consequently weak, began to fail.

Stocks called "industrial stocks," that had been watered in Wall Street, cordage trusts, lead trusts, whisky trusts, railroad stocks that had been watered, began to tumble down to something like natural rates, and you had a panic. Banks which were weak began to fail, and the people began a run on banks which were strong. The whole country became alarmed. People began to take their money out of the banks and put it into safedeposit vaults or into their safes at home. It is said they ought to let their money remain in the banks. Well, probably they ought to do so; but what is the difference? The banks are

afraid to let the money go out if they have it. Now, the panic has come; and those who conspired to bring it about have got more than they bargained for. The idea is that we can relieve this panic by the repeal of the Sherman law.

Why, Mr. Speaker, I say right here (and history will bear me out in the statement) that while there was some alarm in the country before, yet the moment the British government demonetized silver in India, then the panic began in earnest - not before! That precipitated this panic in its present shape. We all understand that. In this way desolation was brought into many of the States of this Union, and men who had before been prosperous and happy were by the thousands sent as tramps throughout the land.

All parts of the country have felt its effects. It is this fight upon silver that has precipitated this panic; and the repeal of the Sherman law will only intensify it, not relieve it. The panic will be relieved when everything gets so low that people see they can make money by buying; when they begin to buy, prices will go up; and when everybody is buying money will come from its hoarding places and you will have some relief. In no other way will relief come.

Gold is coming to us to-day. Notwithstanding we are told the people across the water are afraid to invest here for fear that we will not pay in gold, yet these people are sustaining prices to-day and sending here all the money that they can spare. There was a panic in gold-using Australia that has bankrupted that whole people and sent terror to the banks all over England. We know that gold cannot be obtained there except by paying for it; yet it is coming here.