"From so much of the second proposition as assigns as a special reason for at present restricting the cointge of silver, 'that the disturbance produced the recent years ;A the silver market has differently affected the monetary situations of several coun tries,' they respectfully dissent, believing, that a policy of action would remove the dis turbance that produced these inequalities.
"In regard to the third and last proposition, they admit that 'some of the states which have the double standard,' or, as they prefer to say, use both metals, 'find it impossible to enter into a mutual engagement for the free coinage of silver.' They, as representatives of the United States, have come here expressly to enter into such an engagement. The difficulty is not with them; and wherever it may be, they trust it may SOOT] be removed.
They entirely concur in the conclusion drawn from this state of the case, that 'it excludes the discussion of the question of the adoption of a common ratio between the two metals.' It is useless to agree upon a ratio between the two metals if the nations are not ready also to adopt a policy to uphold IL We remain upon ours; the European states upon theirs " From the beginning to the end. it was evident that the little countries embraced with France in the Latin union had special interests to protect that made the broader views and leaning of the American delegates obnoxious to them. England, on the other hand, took a rosition at the conference that exhibited all the largeness of view that comes of imperial interests in all parts of the world. a silver unit on one side of the globe and a gold unit on the other, she hopes by the skill of her commercial transactions between the opposite parts to profit by the two different standards, ratIer than by the joint-st tidal d. What part of the membership of the conference represents d the views of
great bauking houses rather than the interests of peoples, it would be difficult to deter mine: but that those interests arc always likely to be too largely represented in such national conferences is evident. That Belgium and the Netherlands should have a vote in the conference coital to that of England, France, or the United States, is an absurdity. That little Switzerland. under the shadow of France, should he the soie determined advocate of the single gold standard was simply amusing. Yet her vote was half that of the United States. The effect of wide national diversity of interests was clearly seen iu the broader viewa of those who.-represented bro.:1(4r interests. The American dele gates were conspicuous at the conference in this, and still more in the thoroughness of • their intelligence, and the humanitarian scope of their aims.
The report of this monetary conference, prepared by Mr. S. Dana Horton, secretary of the American delegation, forms vol. 5 of the executive documents of the United States, printed by order of the senate in the third session of the XLVtli congress. 1678-79. In addition to the journal of the proceedings of the conference, and a collection of the monetary papers and statistical tables submitted by each delegation, it contains a large variety of relevant matter of English and American legislation on money, with classic treatises and reports on monetary questions. Besides these it republishes entire the pro ceedings of the first monetary conference held in Paris, June, 1867; the whole forming a volume of 918 pages.