JOSE MARTI: The Monetary Conference of the American Republics (1891)

[magbana]

JOSE MARTI: The Monetary Conference of the American Republics (1891)
Posted by: "Walter Lippmann" [e-mail] walterlx
Sun Apr 5, 2009 12:50 pm (PDT)

(Thanks to our colleague Nelson Valdes for this
note and the translation, from the MINREX website.

(Because of the nature of the Internet, I've taken
the liberty here of breaking up Marti's very long
paragraphs into shorter ones which are easier to
read online. I've not changed a single word by
Jose Marti, of course.)
==============================================

Since the last Reflection makes reference
to Jose marti's essay on May 1891, I thought
that CubaNews readers might be interested,
here is the essay:

http://www.cubaminrex.cu/josemarti/jose%20marti%20vers%20ingles/marti-monetary%20conference.htm

Here is Fidel Castro's reflection which refers to this:
Fidel Castro: Why is Cuba being excluded?
http://www.cuba.cu/gobierno/reflexiones/2009/ing/f040409i.html

Not the best of translations but an amazing document.
Prescient. Nothing similar anywhere, at the time.

Nelson Valdes

--------------------

The Monetary Conference of the American Republics

On May 24, 1888, the President of the United States invited the people of the Americas and the Kingdom of Hawaii in the Pacific Ocean, to an International Conference in Washington, convoked by the Senate and the House of Representatives for the purpose of studying, among other things, "the adoption by each government of a common silver currency to be put into compulsory use by the citizens of every American nation in their reciprocal commercial transactions."

On April 7, 1890, the International Conference, of which the United States was a part, recommended the establishment of an international monetary union with the minting as a basis of this union, of one or more international currencies, uniform in weight and legality, to be used by all the countries represented at this Conference. It also proposed that a commission should meet in Washington to study the quantity, current rate, value, and ratio of the metals from which the international currency could be minted.

On March 23, 1891, after a month's delay requested by the International Monetary Commission meeting in Washington at the request of the U.S. delegation, "to have time to become acquainted with the opinion pending in the House of Representatives regarding the free minting of silver," the U.S. delegation declared to the Conference that the creation of a common silver currency of compulsory use in all the American nations was a fascinating dream that could not be attempted without the agreement of the other world powers.

The delegation recommended the use of gold and silver for the currency in a fixed ratio. It wished that all American nations and the Kingdom of Hawaii seated at the Conference, would together invite all the powers to a Universal Monetary Congress.

What is the lesson to be learned by America from the International Monetary Commission, convoked in 1888 by the United States, with the approval of Congress, to discuss the adoption of a common silver currency, and to which the United States says, in 1891, that the common silver currency is a fascinating dream?

What should be needed is not the form of things, but their spirit. What matters is what is real, not what is seeming. In politics, what is real is what cannot be seen. Politics is the art of combining, for an increasing inner well-being, a country's diverse or opposing factors, and of saving the country from the open hostility or the covetous friendship of other nations.

In every invitation among nations one must look for hidden reasons. No nations does anything contrary to its own interests, from which it can be deduced that what a nation does is to its own advantage. If two nations do not share common interests, they can not get together. Should they do so, they would clash. Lesser nation, still in the throes of gestation, cannot safely join forces with those seeking a remedy for the excess production of a compact and aggressive population, and a drainage for their own uneasy rabbles, in a union with the lesser nations.

The political acts of true republics are the composite result of the elements of the national character, the economic needs, the party needs, and the needs of the politicians at the helm. When one nation is invited to join another, ignorant and bewildered politicians would be able to do so hastily, young people entranced with beautiful ideas would praise it injudiciously, and venal or demented politicians would receive it as a favor and glorify it with obsequious words.

But he who feels in his heart the anguish of his country, he who is foresighted and vigilant, must take inquires and be capable of telling what elements make up the character of the host nation and the guest nation, and whether they are predisposed to the common effort because of common antecedents and customs, and whether or not it is probable that the dreaded elements of the host country could develop in the union envisaged by it, at some risk to the guest country.

He must enquire into the political forces of the country extending the invitation, as well as into the interests of its parties, and the interests of its men at the moment the invitation is extended. Whoever reaches a decision without prior investigation, or desires the union without knowledge, or recommends it merely because of some enticing words and bewilderment or defends it because of his puny provincial soul, will damage America.

At what precise moment was the International Monetary Commission convened and subsequently held? Does it turn out from it, or not, that the American International policy is, or is not a banner of local politics and an instrument of party ambition? Has the United States itself given this lesson to Spanish America, or has it not? Should Spanish America ignore it or profit from it?

A nation grows and influences other nations according to the elements composing it. The action of one country, in an alliance of countries, will conform to that country´s salient elements, and cannot differ from them. If a lush and fragrant pasture is made available to a hungry horse, the horse will rush in, bury itself in the grass up to the withers, and angrily nip at anyone who bothers it.

Two condors or two lambs come together without as much danger as a condor and a lamb. The same young condors, happily engaged in the spirited games and boastful squabbles of fledging, would unable to defend, or would not arrive in time and together to defend, the prey a mature condor would snatch from them. To see ahead is the essential quality in the building and governing of nations. Before joining another nation, it must be seen what harm or what benefit can accrue naturally out of the elements composing that nation.

It is not necessary merely to ascertain whether the nations are as grate as they appear, and whether the same accumulation of power that dazzles the impatient and incapable has come about at the expense about at the expense of higher qualities, and by virtue of qualities which threaten those who admire that power. But rather, even when the greatness is genuine and profound, durable, just, useful, and cordial, it is quite possibly of another kind and the result of other methods than the greatness that can be aspired to unaided, and reached of its own accord through its own methods-the only feasible ones-by a nation with a different concept if life and living in a different atmosphere and in a different way.

When life is shared, ideas and customs must be shared. For those who must live together, it is not enough for their objectives in life to be the same, but their way of living must be so as well. Otherwise they fight and scorn, and hate each other for their differences in their in manner as they would for their differences in their objectives. Countries without common methods, even when their goals are identical, cannot unite to achieve their common purposes through identical means.

Nor even he knows and sees can honestly say-for this can be said only by he who does not know or see, or who because of his own interests is unwilling to know or see-that in the United States prevails today that most human and virile -although always egotistical and conquering-element of the rebellious colonists, whether younger sons of the nobility, or Puritan bourgeoisie.

But this element-which consumed the native race, fostered and lived on the slavery of another race, and reduced or robbed the neighboring countries-has been sharpened instead of softened by the continuous grafting of the European crowd, a tyrannical breeding of political and religious despotism whose only common quality is the accumulated appetite for exerting over the rest the authority that was exerted over themselves. They believe in need, in the barbarian's right as the only right: "This will be ours because we need it".

They believe in the incomparable superiority of the Anglo-Saxon race over the Latin" They believe in the inferiority of the Blacks whom they enslaved yesterday and vex today, and of the Indians, whom they are exterminating. They believe that the Spanish American nations are made up principally of Indians and Blacks.

Until the United States knows more about Spanish America, and respects it more,-although with the incessant, urgent, and wise explanations of our people and resources it could come to respect it-can this country invite Spanish America to a union that would be honest and useful to Spanish America.

Whoever says economic union says political union. The nation that buys, commands. The nation that sells, serves. Trade must be balanced to assure freedom. A nation eager to die sells to more than one. A country's excessive influence on another's trade becomes political influence.

Politics is the work of men who surrender their feelings to interest, or sacrifice part of them to it. When a strong nation supplies another with food, it makes the latter serve it. When a strong nation wants to fight a battle with another, it demands allegiance and service from those nations dependent upon it.

The first thing a nation does to dominate another is to separate it from other nations. Let the country desiring freedom be free in business affairs. Let it distribute its commerce among equally strong countries. If it must prefer one, let it prefer the one that needs it least and scorns it least. Let there be no unions of America against Europe, nor with Europe against an American nation.

The geographical fact of living together in America does not oblige political union, except in the mind of some candidate or some college graduate. Commerce follows land and water ways, and goes after whoever can offer something in exchange, be it monarchy or republic. Union with the world, and with a part of it; nor with one part against another. If the family of American republics has one mission, it is not that of being driven by one of them against future republics.

Nor in agreement on a currency, which is an instrument of trade, can a healthy nation-out of reverence for a country that never came to its assistance, or does so because of emulation and fear of another-dispense with those nations that advance to it the funds needed for its enterprises, make it love them because of their faith, wait for it in its crises and offer it a means of escape from them, treat it as an equal without showing arrogant disdain, an buy its products.

Only one should be the currency all over the universe. It shall be. Everything primitive, such as currency differences will disappear when there will no longer be any primitive nations. Let the earth be peopled so that an equal and cultured peace prevails in both commerce and politics. A uniform currency must be attempted. All that prepares for it must be done. The legal use of the essential metals must be acknowledged. A fixed ratio between gold and silver must be established.

All that brings man closer together and makes life more moral and tolerable must be desired and helped to become a reality. All that brings nations together must be realized. But the way to bring them together is not by causing some to rise up against others, nor can the groundwork for world peace be laid by arming a continent against the nations that have given life to most of its countries, and are maintaining them with their purchases. Nor is it by inviting the American nations, in debt to Europe, to unify-with the nation that never extended them credit-a currency whose purpose is to compel their European creditors, who do extend them credit, to accept a currency rejected by their creditors.

The currency of commerce must be acceptable to the countries engaged in commerce. Any changes in currency must be made at least in accord with those countries with commerce is greatest. The seller cannot afford to offend his best customer, who extends credits, to please the small buyer, or who refuses to buy from him and denies him credit. A needy debtor must not offend or even alarm his creditors.

A currency upsetting to countries with which you trade much not be introduced into countries which do not trade much, or do not fail to trade for currency reasons. When the greatest obstacle to the recognition and standardization of the silver currency is the fear of its overproduction in the United States, and of the fictitious value the United States can give it by means of its legislation, then everything that increases this fear harmful to silver. The future of the silver currency lies in the moderation of its producers. To force it is to devalue it.

Spanish American silver will rise or fall with the world's silver. If Spanish American countries sell their products principally, if not exclusively, in Europe, and receive loans and credit from Europe, what good can result from adopting, through a system wishing to do violence to the European one, a currency that would not be received, or would be received devalued, in Europe? If the greatest obstacle to the elevation of silver and its fixed relation to gold is the fear of its fictitious value and overproduction, what benefit can accrue-either for the Spanish American countries producing silver or for the United States itself-from a currency that would insure a greater dominion and circulation for the United States silver?

But the Pan-American Congress, which could have seen what it did not always see, failed to free the American republics from the future compromises from which it did not free them. It should have studied the proposals of the convocation in the light of its political and local antecedents-the large surplus of manufactured goods brought about by an unruly protectionism, the Republican Party's need to cajole its protectionist supporters, the frivolity with which a political master magician could paint an imperialistic idea with republican colors and at the same time flatter, like a candidate's banner, the interests of the industrialists eager to sell, and the latent and hardly mature tendency to subjugation in the national blood.

The Pan-American Congress, which postponed what it did not wish to resolve because of an unwise spirit of needless concession, or could not resolve because of the devious pledges or too little time, recommended the creation of an International Monetary Union, the establishment of one or more international currencies, and the meeting of a Commission to decide upon its type and rules. The American republics paid polite attention to the recommendation.

Delegates from most of them met in Washington. Mexico and Nicaragua, Brazil and Peru, Chile and Argentina delegated their resident ministers. The minister from Argentina resigned his post later to be filled by another delegate. The other republics sent especial delegates. Paraguay had no representation. Neither did Central America, with the exception of Nicaragua and Honduras, whose delegate, a North American admiral's son, was unable to speak Spanish.

By unanimous agreement the minister from Mexico presided over the Commission. There were sessions on protocol, rules and regulations, previous committees. The common topic here was not the currency, but doubt, or certainty, that an agreement could be reached . And there were heated exchanges in debates. One delegate spoke about "true commerce", another prematurely declared himself hostile to that "impossible idea". A United States delegate demanded a long delay "to have time to become acquainted with the opinion pending in the House or Representatives on the free minting of silver".

And still another, having brought the over-presumption of the United States delegate within the legal bounds of courtesy, established that "it might be understood that the delay was to enable the delegation from the host country to complete its preparatory studies, since by no means would it be assumed that the opinion of the House of Representatives would necessarily alter the opinions of the Commission".

Once the delay was arranged, and the House had disbanded without voting the law of free silver, the various delegations again occupied their places at the Commission table. Perhaps some of them had heard what the country's notables were saying without reservations. Perhaps they had heard that those who passed for friends of the government majority did not regard the Commission favourably; that the government was displeased by the minority's interest in maintaining allegedly through cunning, a continental policy; and that this dangerous bragging about a continent-wide policy was not even by a minority but by one man; that this empty-headed Commission should disband so that it would not serve as a political joker for a candidate who has no qualms, and knows how to profit from anything; that the simple discussion of a common silver currency both alarmed and offended the supporters of gold, whose opinions prevail on the present advisory committees of the Republican Party; that the Spanish American countries would undoubtedly see for themselves open, through their idea of courtesy or their impatience for false progress, to a policy which draws them-through the flattery of words and the threads of intrigue-into a union forged by those who propose it with a concept different from that of those who accept it.

A U.S. delegate stood up before the Commission, convoked by the United States to adopt a universal currency, and proposed, supported by a firm exposition of monetary truths-in which it termed an International currency a "fascinating dream"-that the Commission should declare inopportune the creation of one or more common silver currencies; that it be judged that the establishment of the double silver and gold standard, with a universally accepted relationship, would facilitate the minting of those currencies, that it should recommend that the republics represented at the Conference, through the mediation of their respective governments, should all together convoke a Universal Monetary Conference to discuss the establishment of a uniform and appropriate monetary system based upon gold and silver.

"There is another and far more extensive world across the ocean", said the delegate, "and that world's insistence on not elevating silver to the dignity of gold is the great and insuperable current obstacle to the international adoption of silver". The United States, then, pointed out to a complacent America the risk the latter might have run in acceding too hastily to the United States´ suggestions.

The Commission gave the assignment of studying the U.S. proposal to five countries: Chile, Argentina, Brazil, Colombia and Uruguay, and the Commission unanimously agreed to recommend acceptance of the North American proposals. "The Commission could not find it surprising that the U.S. delegates should recognize the truths which the International Commission had found itself obliged to recognize on its own account". "Since its elementary justice to do so, the Commission respected the principle of submitting to every nation on earth the proposal to standardize the substances and their proportions in the currencies which must be used by every nation in their commercial transactions".

"It would be a dream, unbefitting the greatness and generosity to which the republics are obliged, to refuse directly or indirectly-violating natural interests and human duties-to discuss this most freely with the other nations of the globe". But the Commission did not propose, as did the United State, that "all the world powers" be invited, "to avoid running the risk, with an invitation not sufficiently justified, of instilling fear-no less real for being unfounded-in the powers that would consider summoning as a determination, no matter how skilled and dissembled, to hurry them into a solution they would surely reach before by themselves, if they so desired, if their suspicions are aroused, or their punctilio is wounded by an insistence that would have no reason to attach to the monetary problem a single new factor of importance, or a single unknown fact".

"Silver must gradually move closer to gold." "Overproduction moves silver away from gold." "Silver currencies cannot, must not, be made to disappear." "A uniform currency must be gradually established, but through the honest and trusting agreement of all the working people on earth to assure it a durable basis and not through the violent means of cunning taken to the economy, which foster ill-will and provoke retaliation and cannot last." "But the joint invitation is not recommended." And when upon reviewing the monetary details it was the Commission's turn to note the spirit in which Spanish America understood them, and now understand whatever concerns the individual and independent life of its people, it noted it thus:

"The countries represented at this Conference did not come here because of the false attraction of innovations not yet in season, nor because they did not know all the factors that preceded and accompanied the fact of its convocation, but to give sign-easy for those who are sure of their destiny and their ability to attain it-of that friendly courtesy so gratifying and useful among both nations and men. They came here to give a sign of their readiness to discuss in good faith all that is believed to be proposed in good will; to give a sign of the affectionate desire to support, with the United States as with the other nations of the world, whatever contributes to the peace and well-being of men"

"There must be no reprehensible haste either in promoting or contracting among nations any unnecessary commitments beyond the limits of Nature and reality." "The function of the American continent is not to unsettle the world with new factors of rivalry and discord, nor to reestablish the imperial system under other names and methods wherever republics corrupt and die; but to discuss in peace and honesty with those nations which in the hazardous hour of emancipation sent us their soldiers, and in the restless years of formation are keeping their strongboxes open to us."

"All nations should meet in friendship as often as possible, to gradually replace the forever-dead system of groups and dynasties with the system of universal growth, regardless of the language of isthmuses and the barriers of oceans." "Every nation's door should be kept open to the enriching and legitimate freedom of all nations. The hands of every nation should be kept free to develop the country without restrictions and according to its distinctive nature and its own elements."

When the host rises to his feet, the guests do not insist upon remaining seated at the table. When guests who have come from far away, more because of courtesy than appetite, find the host at the door saying that there is nothing to eat, the guests do not push him aside or enter his house by force or shout for him to open the dining room. The guests should say aloud their courtesy reasons for coming, and that was no out of need or servility, so their host will not consider them to have been carved on one knee or that they are puppets who come and go at the whim of the puppeteer.

Then they should leave. There is a way of withdrawing, with the back turned around, that adds stature. A Spanish-American delegate, aware that the Monetary Commission had no other purpose than to "achieve what had been recommended", and falling to see that a recommendation automatically includes discussion and confirmation before being accepted, upheld the opinion which, without visible source, went meandering among the delegates that the Monetary Commission had not come, as its promoter the United States believed, to see whether an international currency could and should be created, but to create it now, although the United States itself realized that it could not be created at this time. And the delegate proposed a minutely detailed plan for an American currency which he called "Columbus", patterned after that of the Latin Union, plus a Council of Vigilance "resident in Washington."

The United States had not said that the obstacle to the creation of the International currency was the House of Representatives opposition to voting for the free coinage of silver, but the opposition of the vast world across the sea to the acceptance of the silver currencies in a fixed and equal relation to gold. But a Spanish -American delegate asked: "Would it not be wiser, assuming that the new House of Representatives will vote for the free minting of silver before the year's end, to suspend the Conference sessions until, say, January 1, 1892, when this matter will probably have been decided by the U.S. government?"

And when, out of respect for the guests, another delegate urged a plain and prudent acceptance of the U.S. proposals, except the recommendation of a World Conference, a Spanish-American delegate, who speaks no Spanish tried to demand and obtain a suspension of the sessions. Who could be interested, for the Spanish-Americans were not, in a continuance of the U.S.-sponsored Commission counter to the conclusive opinion of the United States itself? Who, in a largely Spanish-American assembly, spurred opposition to the U.S. proposals?

Who, aside from those who make banner out of the continental policy proposed by the United States, was harmed by the idea of a continental currency being declared impossible in the Commission convoked for its study by the United States itself? Why did it, and how could so naturally arise-in a Monetary composed mostly of Spanish-Americans- the thought of opposing the closing of a Commission assembled to discuss a project expressly declared impossible to carry out?

If they themselves were not benefiting from it, then what interest, in their midst, availed itself of their excessive good will and put them at its service? Or, according to those familiar with the inner workings of politics, was it that the interest of a political group, or of a bold and obstinate U.S. politician, by hidden means and private influences roused an assembly of nations against the sober and considered judgement of the U.S. government?

Was it that the assembly of Spanish-American nations was going to serve the interests of him who compels them into confused alliances, dangerous alliances, impossible alliances, disregarding the advice of those who-because of their local partisan interests, or because of international justice-are opening the doors to them so they may be saved from those alliances?

The assembly of delegates pondered, feared, applied pressure, and ran the great risk of doing what ought no to have been done: leaving standing -at the whim of a desperate and unscrupulous alien policy-an assembly which, because of the complex and delicate nature of relations between the United States and many of the Spanish-American nations, could, in the hands of a ruthless candidate, yield to the United States more than would be convenient to the respect and security of the Spanish American nations.

To appear accommodating to the point of weakness would not be the best way of escaping the dangers to which a reputation for weakness is exposed in trading with a competitive and overflowing nation. Wisdom does not lie in corroborating a reputation for weakness, but in using the occasion to show oneself energetic without risk. And in this matter of risk, when one chooses the propitious time and uses it with moderation, the least dangerous course of action is to be energetic.

Who builds nations upon serpents? But if there was a battle; if the eagerness for progress in the still unformed republics leads their children, because of a singular deflection of reason or a bitter leavening of servility, to greater trust in the virtue of progress in nations where they were not born than in nations where they were; if a yearning to see their native land grow leads them to the blindness of hungering for methods and things which in other places are due to factors foreign or hostile to their countries, which must grow in accord with its own features and their resultant methods; if the natural caution of nations grounded close to North America did not consider advisable what, due to that nearness, is of greater interest to them than to others; if local and respectable prudence, or fear, or personal obligation softened men's character more than what Spanish-American independence and creation affairs call for, these things were not apparent in the Monetary Commission, for it agreed to dissolve.

La Revista Ilustrada. New York, May, 1891

=========================================
WALTER LIPPMANN
Los Angeles, California
Editor-in-Chief, CubaNews
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/CubaNews/
"Cuba - Un Paraíso bajo el bloqueo"
====================================