Wood County reporter. [volume] (Grand Rapids [i.e. Wisconsin Rapids], Wis.) 1857-1923, 1876-03-30
Financial Lunacys

NIX. 1lhNRl SAhEf DAIISD HIS I'LL dTlI-
Gle in the March number of the atlantic
Ao7sthly on the currency question, in
which he informs the public that green
backs are not and never have been de-
preciated. As to the question whether
=" the greenback today is deprecated
money" he plumply says: mo; not at
ALL" How does MIR. Baird sustain this
position? Let US hear him, as follows:
As soon rs the grcenback was issued in 1852 and
made non-c convertible with gold, it ceased TO
huctnate IN value with gold and became the
standard of payment, of which the money of &C
count dating from that time is the expression 1t
is to-day the standard and in its money OF account
are expressed the prices of gold as we'll as silver
coins and bullion every dealer knows and "A
his Books Of account completely demonstrate
How can thing he deprecated in comparison
with itself? Gold is al premium; the greenbacIis
not at discount because it sitself the standard.
Mr.. Baird here deceives himself with
mere jingle of words. Here is piece of
gold Of definite weight and fneneSs,
which the law calls dollar and declares
to be legal tender in payment of a debt
amounting to a dollar. Here is a piece
of paper, which Mr.. Baird calls green
back" but which the law calls note of
the United States" pledging the faith of
the United States to pay q dollar to the
bearer, and which the law still further
says shall be legal tender at its face
value in payment of all debts, public and
private, with certain exceptions. Mr.
Baird holds promissory note against
John Smith, in which the latter stipulates
to pay the former a dollar. This debt OF
dollar, under the law as it now stands,
may be paid either with the greenback"
or the coined dollar Either is legal
tender and will discharge the debt
John Smith says to Mr. Baird: Il owe
you dollar, and am ready to pay it.
Here is 'greenback' in which the Gov
eminent promises to pay a dollar, and
here is the gold dollar promised Take
which you please and deliver me up my
note" Which will Mr.: Baird take? If
he studies his own interest, he will take
the gold dollar and let John Smith keep
the "greenback." Why Simply be-
cause lie knows that he. can 90 into the
market with the gold dollar and there buy
more with it than he could if he took the
" greenback" and attempted to make the
same use of it. As he reasons, so every
other man would reason in like circum-
stances. He knows and everybody knows
that the gold dollar and the greenback'
dollar are unequal in their purchasing
power; that they will not exchange for
each other as equivalents; and that the
gold dollar passes at a higher value, rela-
lively to other things, than the green
back" dollar. He ought to know that the
only reason why the latter circulates at
any value is the expectation that it will
ultimately be paid by the former or its
equivalent. These are the facts in the case.
Now, whether Mr.. Baird chooses to say
that gold brings apremium, or greenbacks
are or are not at a discount, does not make
pins difference with the facts This is
mere matter of financial rhetoric. The
appropriate statement is that greenbacks
are at discount; not as compared with
themselves, but as compared with
gold money. They are deprecated by the
full amount of the discount; and, as this
discount varies at different times, the de-
probation is afluctuating one. Both kinds
of money are legal tender for the pay
ment OF debts; but one kind happens to be
the money of 0dEue and the money of the
commercial world, while the other is the
money of credit, absolutely worthless in
the event that the Government should de-
termine never to redeem it.
Mr.. Baird tumbles himself headlong in
to the common fallacy of all the inf1a-
tionists, that money is purely and abso-
lutely the creature OF law, and that one
article may just as well be employed for
use as another, provided the law
so ordains. This excludes the commodity
value Of the article itself as an element of
money, and thereby withdraws from it
tne most vital and important idea. One
who commits this mistake may be expect
ed to reason about money just as lunatics
reason about other things; and this ex-
pectatiOn Mr.. Baird certainly has not dis
z Independent.