New-York daily tribune. [volume] (New-York [N.Y.]) 1842-1866, 1854-09-25
THE BULLETIN on YARDsTICKs.

THE BULLETIN on YARDSTICks.
Our contemporary of The PHILADELPHIA Buiietin is
not satisfied with our recent exhibit of bis political
economy. He insists that he "did not ssy that
money being mere human institution, could
0bave no value whatsoever" Anxious to do him
Justice if we have failed to do so before, we turned
again to the cabinet of literary curiostes in which
we had preserved hisremarkabe article, and there
we found the following:
Money and the precious metals are two different
thincs The precious metals are values,
productions of nature and oflabor. Money
i huinon institution. like Government, like the
Church ike the yard-stiok, like the thermometer
like The EreHiHg Bulletin.
Now, what does this mean but that money is
mere measure Of value, valueless in itself It's,
if we are to believe our contemporary, thing that
we may manufacture with the same facility that
wewould yard sticks, thermometers, ne wspaper,
and discard with equal facility when their sery-
ices cease to be required, cutting, as he says, las
many yard-sticks as we need. without stopping
" to consider the cost of the paper or the wood
of which they are composed" If this does not
bear US out in the view we presented of Tae Bat
hfin's financial doctrines, we must plead guilty to
the charge of inability to understand the value Of
words.
Our contemporary reiterates the assertion that
"the scarcity of money is to be regarded as the
"uDfaling barometer Of the amount of proddc-
ton, and talicises it again, regarding it, we
doubt not, as wonderful discovery-ss it GER
tainly would be, were it only true. The neces-
sary deduction from such proposition would be
that il we desired to ascertain the amount of
production We should have only to consult The
new barometer and ascertain how scarce and
how high was money and the less of 1t that could
be obtained from a given quantity OF labor the
higher should we rate the pro iuctiveness of tlat
labor According to this new theory, all, as it
appeared to US, that would be required to aug
mtnt to an indefinite extent the power of pro-
duction would be to expel the L" yard-stieks"
altogether, but our contemporary denies that it is
fair deduction from his proposition. Whether
it is so or not we will leave to or readers to de-
eide.
In proof of the utter 6bsurdity Of this PROPOSE
ton we called the attention of our frield of The
Bulletin to the fact that in lS4l-2, when labor
was unstable and production small, money was
upattainable, and that in lci6 when lasOr was in
demand and production large, money was readily
attanable by all who had reasonable security to
offer for 1t. and az moderate prices-and nov, in
proof of the shifts to which our free trade friend,
are forced to resort. we give his reply as follows:
"1he rate Of interest was high in l9il-2, because
the productivity of the country had been immense
during the previous years. The immense productive
less Of 1876 led 10 the enhancement vi the rates Of
interest which succeeded
This assertion in regard to the "immense pro-
ductiyity" of the country during the years i'm
mediatey preceding the enactment of the tariff
of l342, will certainly amuse all those of our
readers who recOllect the course of things in
Ie40 and IL, when houses had ceased to be built,
land had ceased to be sold except by the Sheriff,
roads had ceased to be made, mills and furnaces
bad ceased TO be bought, and labor had ceased to
fnd market. Our contemporary, however, does
not venture TO assert that at the actual period of
ls4l-2 production was large, but only that in
some previous years it had been so. How far
this view will serve his purpose he may himself
determine by recurring to bis fsvorite theory of
the ''yard. stick" and perusng the illustration of
it given in his first paper. On doing so, he will
find that the price of "yard sticks" rises or de-
clines with the quantity of cloth requiring at tss
momtrt to be measured, and not with that
which bad required to be measured in previous
years. That done, let him next inquire how many
"!srd-stieks' could have been required 10 the
year to which We have referred, and he will end
that il must have been fewer than in any other OF
The last forty years-snd yet small as was the
deusnd the price was higher than at almost
any previous period Of our history. The
Produetiveness of labor had greatly di min.
ished AID the quantity Of money required
had greatly declined, but with that decline there
had been still more rapid decline in the power
TO "obtain and retain gold." Our cotemporary
is disposed to charge us with misrepresentation.
but before removing the mote from our eve it
might be well for him to take the beam from his
own.
Again, the great produc iveness Of 1916" is
admitted. 1t is not denied that il was far greater
than had been that of ls4l-2, nor will it be de-
MED that there had been steady increase from
the date Of the passageOf the act Of 1872 Why
then, did not the rate of interest rise from the
years 1541-2 to that Of 1856 WHY did tba