23 
 6 
 
 ADDRESS 
 
 BBPORE THE 
 
 Washington County Agricultural 
 
 Society, 
 
 1896. 
 
ADDRESS 
 
 DELIVERED AT THE 
 
 TWENTY-SECOND ANNUAL FAIR 
 
 OF THE 
 
 Washington County Agricultural 
 Society, 
 
 September i6th, 1896, 
 
 ROWLAND HAZARD, 
 
 Presidetit of the Society . 
 
 WAKEFIEIvD, R. I.: 
 D. GILLIES' SONS, TIMES PRINT, 
 
 lSq6. 
 

 BY rR«NsrFf? 
 
 JUN 3 '910 
 
y 
 
 
 i 
 
 ^ ADDRESS. 
 
 P^ 
 
 Members of the Washington County Agricultural Society, 
 Ladies and Gentlemen : — 
 
 The ordinary phrase with which a speaker "invites" the attention 
 of his audience to his subject, has no place here to-day. There is 
 one subject which forces itself upon our attention; it occupies our 
 thoughts ; it fills our minds ; it is vital to our welfare, shall we have 
 free coinage of silver at the ratio of i6 to i ? 
 
 In former years I have discussed before you the essential points 
 of this question. As long ago as 1877 I touched upon it. The 
 addresses of 1892 and 1893 were largely devoted to it. I am glad 
 to be able to say that I believe the principles I laid down were 
 sound, and in the light of further investigation and greater expe- 
 rience they will stand as correct. But when in 1877 I warned you 
 against the danger of destroying the gold standard and attempting 
 to make silver a standard with gold, I was discussing the matter 
 from a scientific standpoint. The advocates of silver were an insig- 
 nificant number ; those who believed in paper money were more 
 numerous, and even they, the so-called "greenbackers," were quickly 
 voted down. The danger was afar off; it was difficult to make 
 people believe there was any danger. Now the case is different. 
 The storm is upon us. We must examine this question with all the 
 intelligence we possess, and we must decide wisely if we would save 
 ourselves from disaster. 
 
 What is free coinage at the ratio of 16 to i ? It is the attempt 
 to say that as a measure of value 16 ounces of silver shall be the 
 equal of i ounce of gold. Sixty years ago this was very near the 
 
true ratio. At that time the weight of a gold dollar was fixed at 
 25.8 grains of standard gold. The silver dollar was made 16 times 
 as heavy, and contained 412.5 grains of standard silver. In the 
 markets of the world the metals exchanged for each other in this 
 proportion. There were, of course, fluctuations, and in general an 
 ounce of gold was exchanged for rather less than 16 ounces of silver. 
 The actual proportion was nearer 15J ounces of silver for one of 
 gold. But the ratio of 16 to I was a near approximation at that 
 time, and continued to be so down to about the year 1874. 
 
 But since 1874 a great change has taken place. There is a great 
 dispute as to the causes of this change ; there is no dispute what- 
 ever as to the fact, and it is certain that with i ounce of gold you 
 can now buy in the markets of the world over 32 ounces of silver, 
 instead of 16. 
 
 The proposition, therefore, of the free coinage of silver at the 
 ratio of 16 to i, is a proposal to change this market rate for silver 
 which is now firmly established throughout the civihzed world. It 
 is proposed that the United States alone shall say to all holders of 
 silver, "Bring your silver to the mint, and we will double its value. 
 We will coin it into dollars which shall be equal to gold dollars, and 
 will put into those dollars one-half as much silver as a gold dollar 
 will buy." It seems as if the simple statement of this proposal 
 would show its preposterous character. Consider for a moment its 
 effect. There are to-day in the vaults of a single Safe Deposit 
 company in New York 1,700,000 ounces of silver belonging to pri- 
 vate persons. It is worth to-day 68 cents an ounce. If this law is 
 passed, it could be taken to the mint and coined into dollars which 
 would have a debt-paying power of $1.29 an ounce. The owners 
 of that silver would make over half a miUion of dollars by the opera- 
 tion, but they would have done nothing whatever to entitle them to 
 such a profit, and, on the contrary, people to whom debts were 
 owing and who would be obliged to receive this silver in payment 
 of debt, would lose a corresponding amount. The law would trans- 
 
5 
 
 fer property from one man to another arbitrarily and without any 
 justice. 
 
 It is said that this law would favor debtors, and would enable 
 them to pay their debts more easily. This would be true only of 
 the debts existing at the time the law went into effect. These 
 debts could be discharged for half their present value. Would that 
 be honest ? If not honest, the question is settled. The sound 
 judgment of the American people cannot be brought to favor dis- 
 honesty. But would such payment be honest? Let us look at this 
 question fairly. 
 
 We have had the gold standard ever since 1834, except during 
 the period of paper money caused by the war. We resumed gold 
 payments in 1879. Since that date a current dollar has meant 25.8 
 grains of standard gold. Every borrower has therefore received 
 gold or its equivalent. With this gold he has purchased, at gold 
 value, goods, machinery, buildings, land or whatever he required in 
 his business, and from which he expected to derive a profit over 
 and above the interest on his loan. When a loan has been made on 
 good business principles, the borrower by the use of the money 
 borrowed makes such a profit. Sometimes mistakes are made, but 
 as a rule the borrower makes a profit besides paying his interest. 
 When the time of payment comes he is therefore wealthier than 
 when he first borrowed, better able to pay the loan, or better able 
 to borrow again. Why should he not pay back the gold he bor- 
 rowed, the use of which has increased his wealth ? There is no 
 good reason. 
 
 It is argued, however, that gold is rising in value, and in the in- 
 terval between the borrowing and the time of payment this rise 
 compels the borrower to pay back more value than he received. 
 This is the argument on which silver advocates rely. Now if it 
 were true that gold is thus appreciating, it is by no means clear 
 that the borrower ought not to return just what he borrows. He 
 makes the loan for his own profit, by the use of the loan he makes 
 
the interest he has agreed to pay, makes his profit, and is in condi- 
 tion to pay back the principal. In this case it is simply a question 
 of interest. The borrower will say, "at the time when I must repay 
 this loan gold will be more valuable than it now is, I must be com- 
 pensated for this increase in value; I can only afford to pay a low 
 rate of interest." This is what actually happens, and whenever cur- 
 rency IS appreciating then interest is low, and whenever currency is 
 depreciating then interest is high. Some curious statistics have re- 
 cently been collected by Professor Irving Fisher demonstrating 
 these facts. It is therefore not clear that, even if gold is appreciat- 
 ing, the borrower ought not to return exactly what he borrows, the 
 fact of appreciation will be discounted in the low rate of interest. 
 
 But the argument we are discussing assumes that there has been 
 a very large increase in the value of gold within the last thirty years. 
 To prove this they say that gold prices of commodities have fallen. 
 It is assunied that a fall in prices means a rise in gold. But this is 
 not necessarily true. New inventions and better machinery contin- 
 ually cheapen the cost of production, and prices fall even if gold re- 
 mains stationary. This is the universal law of prosperous industry; 
 improved methods, lower cost, lower price to the consumer, in- 
 creased comfort to mankind. It is more reasonable to attribute the 
 fall in prices to greater cheapness of production than to the appre- 
 ciation of gold, which is purely conjectural. For instance the rea- 
 son for the fall in the price of wheat, which undoubtedly has been 
 very great, is easily found in the severe competition of wheat pro- 
 duced at low cost from Russia, from the Argentine Republic and 
 from India. So in other cases where prices have fallen, we can find 
 good cause for the fall in increasing supply and lessened cost. Fal- 
 ling prices can be accounted for without the supposition of the 
 appreciation of gold. 
 
 But if v/e turn from commodities to labor, which produces com- 
 modities, we find that wages have not declined. Wages paid in 
 gold are higher than ever before in the world's history. This fact is 
 
7 
 
 shown by the report made to Congress by the committee of which 
 Senator Aldrich was chairman, and which is known as the Aldrich 
 report. This report was made after the most painstaking and judi- 
 cial examination and inquiry, and is of unquestioned authority. 
 The wages of labor measured in gold have risen 69 per cent, since 
 i860. They have risen 20 per cent, since we resumed gold pay- 
 ments in 1879. The silver advocates who allege that gold has ap- 
 preciated cannot explain this fact. It proves that gold has not 
 appreciated. It is easier to procure by labor a dollar's worth of 
 gold than ever before. The borrower of gold has then no justifica- 
 tion in attempting to avoid the repayment of the metal borrowed. 
 The attempt to substitute a cheaper metal will not bear honest 
 scrutiny. 
 
 I am, however, far from saying that all who are inclined to es- 
 pouse the cause of silver are dishonest. They are simply mistaken. 
 They have been deceived by fallacious statements. 
 
 One very common idea is that free coinage will make money 
 plenty, and somehow laboring men will be benefited. If this were 
 so, I would be the last to oppose the change. I recognize the fact 
 that when wages are high the country is prosperous, when they are 
 low prosperity is declining. If, therefore, a system of currency can 
 be devised by which wages can be raised and the condition of the 
 laboring man improved, that system should be adopted. But I 
 cannot see how the present proposal can produce any such result. 
 It is a proposal to double the price of commodities. The laboring 
 man wants low prices for commodities, not high prices. How will 
 doubling the cost of living improve his condition? Manifestly 
 there can be no improvement in this direction unless wages rise fas- 
 ter than commodities. We all know that this is not so. All ex- 
 perience teaches that wages rise more slowly than commodities; 
 they are the last to feel the effects of advancing prices. Those of 
 us who can remember the great advance in prices which took place 
 with the issue of sfreenbacks in the war, must have observed this 
 
fact. Between i860 and 1865 prices of commodities went up 132 
 per cent. Wages advanced only 49 per cent. A table from the 
 Aldrich report, printed in this pamphlet, (copies of which are here 
 for distribution) shows this in detail. Wherever, through all history, 
 the currency has been inflated, prices of commodities have risen, 
 and wages have risen much more slowly, if at all. This is seen in 
 Mexico to-day, and, in fact, it is an argument which is gravely used, 
 that the producers of all the commodities which are exported from 
 Mexico have an advantage because labor is so low. They can 
 pay for labor in silver, and by exporting their commodities can get 
 paid for them in gold, which by exchange doubles the silver price 
 at home Whatever truth there is in this argument comes from the 
 fact that labor is forced down to a very low point by the use of 
 silver currency in Mexico. 
 
 We can see there the exact effect of silver free coinage. Silver 
 has become the sole standard. Gold is banished, and is used only 
 in foreign commerce. The laborer is paid in dollars which in com- 
 mon trade pass at the rate of two Mexican dollars for one United 
 States dollar. The Mexican dollar contains a little more silver 
 than our silver dollar, but our dollar is maintained on a parity with 
 the gold dollar by the United States government reserving to itself 
 the right to coin silver dollars. Admit free coinage and the parity 
 could no longer be maintained. Our coinage would sink to the 
 level of Mexican coinage, and our labor would be paid in 50 cent 
 dollars. 
 
 The truth is that wages are paid out of the product of labor. 
 When the laborer is intelligent, and is furnished with the best tools 
 and best facilities of production, then the quantity of his product is 
 larger, and his share in wages is correspondingly large. 
 
 One other favorite argument of the advocates of silver is that the 
 debtor class will be benefited. The creditor class is spoken of as 
 oppressing the debtor class. This whole conception of debtor and 
 creditor classes is misleadincj. The debtor borrows to secure his 
 
own good. He makes money out of his loan. Every one at times 
 owes money and at times has money owing to him. Most people 
 are both debtors and creditors at the same time. A clean cut sepa- 
 ration of these classes is impossible. But if any class is entitled 
 to the name of creditor class it is the laboring class. There is no 
 wage earner who does not have owing to him always some sum for 
 the labor which he has performed. He is not usually paid oftener 
 than once a week, and frequently the term for which he is paid is 
 longer than a week. It is safe to say that every Saturday night 
 there it due to the laboring people of the United States at least one 
 hundred million of dollars for the previous week's work. They are 
 creditors to that amount. The laboring class is the most numerous 
 and most important creditor class which exists. The debt due this 
 class is never fully paid. Each succeeding week adds its hundred 
 millions. Now this law proposes that these laboring men shall be 
 paid with dollars coined out of silver now in possession of private 
 individuals, which has cost the owners a trifle over 50 cents for each 
 dollar. This single statement is sufficient to show the gross injus- 
 tice of such a law. 
 
 Free coinage has been described as a conspiracy against labor, 
 and it is in effect such a conspiracy, for it would degrade laborers 
 to the point of receiving one-half the value at present paid to them 
 in wages. This conspiracy was entered into by the owners of silver 
 mines about the year 1875, when silver, in consequence of enor- 
 mous increase in production, began to decline in value. They 
 thought if they could get the government to purchase it at the for- 
 mer price their mines would be more valuable. Persistent and de- 
 termined efforts have been made ever since to procure the passage 
 of a free coinage law . There has been a paid silver lobby at Wash- 
 ington, and misleading silver literature has been widely circulated. 
 Paid orators have made specious pleas and given out misleading 
 information until many honest people have been made to beHeve 
 that there was some merit in free silver coinage at 16 to i. The 
 
lO 
 
 times have been hard, and the promises of relief made by silver 
 advocates have been very bold and attractive. A proposition to 
 make something out of nothing is always attractive. A sick man is 
 willing to try almost any remedy if the promise of certain relief is 
 made strongly enough. We must not blame men harshly for this, 
 but we must show them their mistake by the light of reason and ex- 
 perience. 
 
 Now it so happens that we have in our own history most valuable 
 teaching on this very subject. In 1792 we began our coinage expe- 
 rience, with the attempt to establish a double standard. For over 
 eighty years the attempt was continued, changes were made in laws, 
 but absolute failure was the result. That you may see the nature 
 of this experiment and learn from it for yourselves the lessons 
 which it teaches, 1 have condensed from the Mint reports and other 
 sources a short history of United States coinage. As it contains 
 tables and statistics I have had it printed that you may take it home 
 and read it at your leisure. I will only summarize it now. 
 
 Our coinage laws began with the law of 1792. This law was 
 framed in accordance with the recommendations of Alexander 
 Hamilton. It fixed the ratio of silver to gold at 15 to i. The 
 standard dollar, or unit, was fixed at 24I grains of pure gold, and 
 also at 37 1^ grains of pure silver. These two units were declared 
 of equal value ; both were unlimited legal tender, and there was 
 free coinage. Hamilton's system was the most perfect system for 
 the estabUshment of the double standard which had ever been for- 
 mulated, but the result did not justify the expectation. Gold was 
 exported as fast as coined, because there was a profit realized by 
 sending it to Europe. The commercial ratio did not remain the 
 same as the legal ratio. 
 
 Silver dollars were also sent over to the West Indies because of a 
 small profit made by exchanging them for Spanish dollars. In 1806 
 it was found that the United States silver dollars were sent out of 
 the country as fast as coined. The mint was kept busy to no pur- 
 
1 1 
 
 pose. In view of this fact Thomas Jefferson, then president, gave 
 an order through his secretary of state, James Madison, to discon- 
 tinue the coinage of silver dollars. The demonetization of silver 
 dates back to that order made by the authority of Thomas Jefferson 
 in 1806. The commercial conditions prevented the use of silver 
 dollars. Jefferson recognized the fact, and stopped their coinage. 
 
 The laws of 1834 and 1837 were then enacted, but they did not 
 bring silver dollars into use. We practically had no silver dollars in 
 circulation until 1878. 
 
 Please take notice of these points in this history. The law of 
 1792 enacted a double standard, but after forty-two years trial it 
 failed in the attempt. It attempted to fix a ratio of 15 to i ; the 
 commercial ratio became more than 15 to i, in spite of the law. 
 Under that law of 1792 we had no gold; the acts of 1834 and 1837 
 were passed to remedy this state of things ; they fixed the ratio at 
 16 to I. The attempt was still made to continue the double stand- 
 ard. These acts also failed. Nineteen years more of trial were 
 added to the previous forty-two years. The act of 1853 then 
 became necessary, because under the act of 1837 we had no silver, 
 not even enough for small change. The act of 1853 practically 
 abandoned the double standard. It made no provision for the 
 coinage of silver dollars, but only for fractional parts of a dollar. 
 It was a confession that the double standard had failed, and it was 
 so stated in congress at the time by the chairman of the committee 
 having charge of the act. 
 
 This failure to establish the double standard was fully recognized 
 after sixty years of trial. It failed when the difference between the 
 legal ratio and the commercial ratio was comparatively small. Ac- 
 cording to the best authorities, the commercial ratio was about 15I 
 to I ; the legal ratio sought to be established was at first 15 to r, 
 then 16 to I ; and yet the law could not overcome that small diff"er- 
 ence. It could not move the commercial ratio down to 15 to i, 
 nor up to 16 to I. What hope is there that a law can change the 
 
12 
 
 commercial ratio now existing of over 30 to i, and make it 16 to i ? 
 
 The law of 1873 only legalized the total disuse of the silver 
 dollars which had previously existed for many years. To attach to 
 this law of 1873 any importance in demonetizing silver, is to ignore 
 the facts of history. The disuse of silver dollars had taken place 
 long before, in consequence of natural laws which congress is pow- 
 erless to overcome. 
 
 The point to be observed is, that ivhen a profit can be made by 
 sending coins out of the country^ they 7vill inevitably be sent out, and 
 iviil not remain in circulation. 
 
 If you keep this point in mind, you will see as you read this his- 
 tory of our coinage, the folly of trying to fix by law values which 
 differ from those fixed by the judgment of mankind in the markets 
 of the world. 
 
 The general conclusion from our experience is that the attempt 
 to estabhsh a double standard has proved a complete failure. This 
 agrees with the experience of other nations. France and the 
 nations of the Latin union tried it and failed. Pevious to 1874 
 there was in Europe an approximation to the circulation of both 
 metals at the coining ratio of 15^ to r. Sometimes there was a 
 small premium on gold, and sometimes a premium on silver. These 
 premiums showed that the parity was not perfect. But with the 
 great increase in silver production in 1874, the Latin union limited 
 the coinage of silver. In 1878 it was stopped entirely. There is 
 no free coinage in France or in any other European nation to-day. 
 The value of the silver franc is kept at par with the gold franc, by 
 the same means that the silver dollar is maintained at par with the 
 gold dollar in this country. Under free coinage this parity could 
 not be maintained a day. 
 
 The gold franc is the real standard in France. In our country 
 the gold dollar containing 25.8 grains of standard gold has been the 
 standard of value ever since 1837. This standard has been entirely 
 satisfactory. It has given us the least changeable measure of value 
 
13 
 
 known to civilized man. It is the attempt to violently change this 
 standard, which has deranged our monetary system, inspired dis- 
 trust, destroyed credit, stopped industry, and is now opening the 
 door of the laborer's cottage, that j^lenty may go out, and want may 
 enter. 
 
 Much of the obscurity which surrounds this subject will vanish if 
 you reflect on the true function of gold in our currency. The 
 modern methods of business recjuire very little gold to pass from 
 hand to hand. Its most important function is to furnish the stan- 
 dard with which to measure all other values. I am aware that this 
 method of speaking of value as belongmg to an object is open to 
 criticism. Value is not a quality, it grows out of the relation which 
 one desirable object has to another. By comparison we determine 
 which is the most valuable to us. So we can measure value by its 
 relation to other objects which are desirable or valuable. Value is 
 thus analagous to weight. Weight is not a quality of a stone. It 
 is the relation which exists between the mass of the stone and the 
 mass of the earth. The same stone on a different planet would 
 have a different weight. But we measure this relation of weight by 
 comparing one weight with another. So we compare one value 
 with another. So long as business men are satisfied they are deal- 
 ing with gold values, the gold itself may be locked up in bank 
 vaults. But it must be known to be in the vaults in order to main- 
 tain confidence. If gold thus performs its office, furnishes a stan- 
 dard, and confidence exists, ninety-five per cent, of commercial 
 transactions are performed by bank credits which offset each other. 
 Gold is not used at all, or only for settlement of small balances. 
 The modern use of bank checks, drafts, notes, bills of exchange 
 and paper money, has furnished a means of doing business with 
 much greater celerity and much less expense than was possible 
 before these inventions. The telegraph and telephone are additional 
 aids. But the uset\ilness of all these inventions is destroyed if the 
 stability of the standard is threatened. For sixty years we have 
 
 J 
 
H 
 
 had the gold standard. About it has grown up this vast compli- 
 cated system of credit. To violently and arbitrarily change this 
 time-honored standard is to strike a blow at all business and invite 
 universal disaster. 
 
 There is one point which I wish to mention because it affords 
 some excuse for the wild desire for change which pervades some of 
 our Western and Southern states. It is true that our National bank 
 system is not perfect. The defect which has been observed, is a 
 certain want of elasticity in the volume of currency. When the 
 grain crops are to be moved from the West, or the cotton crop 
 from the South, a larger volume of currency is required than at 
 other times. Our current circulation admits of httle variation. 
 The West and South cry that their interests are neglected, and it is 
 true that a banking system can be imagined which would answer 
 the purpose better. The Canadian system is better than ours, and 
 we ought not to be ashamed to learn of our neighbors. This 
 defect can and ought to be remedied. 
 
 But it is also said farm products are very low. This is particu- 
 larly true of wheat. It is probable that we must grow less wheat 
 for export. We cannot compete with India and the Argentine 
 Republic. But we are not compelled to grow wheat. Farmers 
 must diversify their products. Each locality must produce those 
 products which will there pay the best, and there must be intelli- 
 gence used in the choice of crops. But granting that the prices of 
 farm products are low, how will coinage of silver at i6 to i benefit 
 the farmer ? We are dependent now on the foreign market for the 
 price of a large part of our agricultural produce. Under free coin- 
 age the pressure to export would be greater than ever, because the 
 price of commodities by rising faster than the wages of laborers 
 would lessen the ability of consumers to consume, and a greater 
 proportion of products would be forced to go abroad. The pressure 
 to export would depress the foreign market, and at the same time 
 the home market would be injured. This injury to the home mar- 
 
15 
 
 ket would be most serious. The consumption which takes the pro- 
 ducts of the farm without long transportation, is the most profitable. 
 So that a general cut down in wages, which would follow the coin- 
 age of silver at i6 to i, could not benefit the farmer. The small 
 gain he would make in hiring his labor cheaper, would be lost many- 
 times over in the injury to his market. If it were otherwise, few 
 farmers would desire to better their own condition by forcing wages 
 down. The farmer stands in very close relation to labor. The 
 prosperous farmer labors himself. The old adge is true: 
 
 "He, who by the land would thrive, 
 Must hold the plow himself, or drive." 
 
 Such a farmer is successful, and he recognizes the fact that his 
 prosperity is bound up and interlaced with the prosperity of those 
 who labor with him. 
 
 One thing is certain, the market for the farmer which will pay 
 him the best is the home market. The farmer will be most pros- 
 perous when all other business is most piosperous. We see how 
 interdependent are all parts of our society from what has recently 
 happened, and what is now taking place. The stability of our stand- 
 ard of value was threatened. Credit was disturbed. Capital became 
 timid. Rates of interest advanced. The building trade, which now 
 consumes immense quantities of iron began to languish. The pro- 
 jectors of all great enterprises hesitated, and many suspended opera- 
 tions. The consumption of iron decreased. Furnace fires were 
 put out. Artisans and workmen were thrown out of work. Then 
 the great iron mines found no market for their ore, and the 
 miners became idle in the mountains of Michigan and Wiscon- 
 sin. In Pennsylvania the coke ovens, which furnished the coke 
 to smelt these ores, have recently put out their fires, and ten thou- 
 sand coke burners are looking for work to supply food to their fam- 
 ilies. All these workers have been deprived of their usual wages. 
 They have no money to buy clothes, and the factories of New Eng- 
 land pile up goods in their warehouses until they are forced to run 
 
i6 
 
 short time, or to suspend work entirely. Tiie single blow at our 
 standard of value, aimed by ignorance and conceit, has paralyzed 
 industry all over our land, and has brought loss and depression to 
 our own doors. The lesson is severe, but it is plain we are so bound 
 together that whatever affects one part affects the whole. The 
 West cannot say to the East, we are independent of you. The East 
 cannot ignore the South, nor the South the North. We are one 
 great country. Every partis dependent on every other part, and all 
 must pull together for the common good. 
 
 We have the best standard of value which exists. We have built 
 upon it our great financial and commercial system. If any section 
 of our country believes it can change this standard and destroy this 
 system without injury to itself it makes a terrible mistake. The 
 mere threat of a change of standard has deprived tens of thousands 
 of workers of their wages. This standard of value, this gold stan- 
 dard, has come down to us from our fathers. It is the outgrowth of 
 experience. Nation after nation has adopted it, until all the great 
 civilized nations are gold standard nations. They have done this 
 because gold is better than silver for the purposes of standard 
 money. To go back to silver would hinder the onward march of 
 civilization. Our duty is to resist every such attempt at retrogres- 
 sion. We must stand firmly for what is right, for what is just, and 
 for what is honest. Then shall we all truly pull together for the 
 common good. 
 
LIBRftRY OF CONGRESS 
 
 002 743 901 9 
 
 i