"It proposes to confer more power upon Mr.McCulloch than was ever before conferred upon any one man in a government claiming to have a constitution." -- Mr.Hooper of Massachusetts magnified the financial achievements of the Government, urged the policy embodied in the bill, and insisted on the importance of restoring the currency to a sound condition at the earliest practicable moment.

He controverted the suggestion which had been made to increase United-States notes to $1,000,000,000, on the ground that the value of that dollar would be constantly fluctuating.
A minority of the commissioners appointed by the preceding Congress to inquire into the state of trade and commerce had presented a specious argument in favor of debasing the coinage, but Mr.Hooper dismissed the proposition summarily and argued strongly for a contraction of legal-tender notes.
-- Mr.Hulburd of New York maintained that taxation could not be increased to meet the existing and maturing obligations of the Government.

He held that under the Acts of June, 1864, and March, 1865, the Secretary had power to sell at home or abroad six per cent coin bonds in any amount to meet short obligations of the Government.
"Under the proposed measure," he said, "authority is specifically asked to withdraw the fractional currency and legal-tender notes, in whole or in part, and to substitute bonds for them.

The like power was never asked for Neckar or for Pitt.

As a principle the proposition is dangerous." He protested vigorously against making any part of the public debt payable in foreign countries.
-- Mr.John Wentworth of Illinois argued in favor of contraction, maintaining that the purpose of the pending bill was to make the Secretary of the Treasury master of the situation.