For quite a number of years after the discovery of gold in California--that is, until the establishment of a government mint there--a large part of the gold that was taken out of the earth, was coined by private persons and companies; and this coinage was perfectly legal. And I do not remember to have ever heard any complaint, or accusation, that it was not honest and reliable. The true and only value, which the coins have as money, is that value which they have as metals, for uses in the arts,--that is, for plate, watches, jewelry, and the like. This value they will retain, whether they circulate as money, or not. At this value, they are so utterly inadequate to serve as _bona fide_ equivalents for such other property as is to be bought and sold for money; and, after being minted, are so quickly taken out of circulation, and worked up into articles of use--plate, watches, jewelry, etc.--that they are practically of almost no importance at all as money. But they can be so easily and cheaply carried from one part of the world to another, that they have substantially the same market value all over the world. They are also, in but a small degree, liable to great or sudden changes in value. For these reasons, they serve well as standards--are perhaps the best standards we can have--by which to measure the value of all other money, as well as other property. But to give them any monopoly as money, is to deny the natural right of all men to make their own contracts, and buy and sell, borrow and lend, give and receive, all such money as the parties to bargains may mutually agree upon; and also to license the few holders of the coins to rob all other men in the prices of the latter's labor and property. 3. The third provision of the constitution, on which the court relies to justify the monopoly of money, is this: The congress shall have power to borrow money. Can any one see any connection between the power of congress "to borrow money," and its power to establish a monopoly of money? Certainly no such connection is visible to the legal eye. But it is distinctly visible to the political and financial eye; that is, to that class of men, for whom governments exist, and who own congresses and courts, and set in motion armies and navies, whenever they can promote their own interests by doing so. To a government, whose usurpations and crimes have brought it to the verge of destruction, these men say: