The Indiana State sentinel. [volume] (Indianapolis) 1868-1895, 1878-01-23
Totals -. sl.Op,6SS s7s
IMPORT ENTRIES OF SILVER.


1t appears, on combining bullion and coin,
that the silver movement for the eleven
years was as follows: Domestic exporls,
S229 749 Oh; exports of imports, S74 S96, 765;
aggregate exports, $304, GAG, 7O9; imports,
SOL 1913 100; excess OF exports over imports,
S203 273 COG Our exports of gold for the
same period were $I99 $50 993, or not far
from double OF our exporis of silver. This
proportion indicates that our chances of
retaining and accumulating silver, as COM
pared with gold, are about two to one in
favor of the former metal
Beginning with fiscal year 1877, state
ment rs to be found OF the different kinds of
domestic silver coin exported. OF the So
292, 7i3 sent abroad in that year, trade dollars
comprised So GU 500 The rest being frac-
tioual coins. s. far as the statistical record
has been published, the exports of these
dollars since che clo>e of the tiscal year have
been as follows: July, $3.50, 1872; August,
$3.50 176; September, $629, 16S; October,
1881 65S; total, 81 S79, 79L At the same rate
OF ext port for the remaining eight months of
the fiscal year the amount would reach a
total of So 639 352 or little short of what it
was in 1877. With such a state OF facts, IL is
exceedingly strange that the secretary IF the
treasury. in his annual report dated Deem
Der g. 1877. should say:
In October last it beclme apparent that
there was no further export demand for
trade dollars, but deposits of silver bullion
were made, and such dollars we're demanded
of the mint for circulation of the United
States, that the owner might secure the diff
ference between the value of such bullion in
the market and United States notes At the
time the mInts were fully occupied by the
issue OF fractional and other coins on account
of the government. Therefore, under author
ity of the law referred to Goint resolution of
July %, 1876 the secretary directed that no
further issues of trade dollars should be
made until necessary again to meet an ex-
port demand"
In point of fact the ports of trade dollars
were SAT- ST5 in October, 1876 or only about
IS per cent greater than in October, 1877. 1t
Is remark able, therefore. that our export of
1881, 65S should have been taken as evidence
of mo further export demand" On such a
basis, the conclusion seems 10 be forced
one, illogical and arbitrary. Even
the secretaTy's exercise of authority
in directing the mint officers 10 stop
the coinage of trade dollars appears
strained, because the joint resolution did
not contemplate an absolute stoppage, but
Limitation merely. the language employed
being Ito limit coinage thereof to such an
amount IS he may deem sufficient TO meet
the export demand for the same" Foras
much as the statistical record shows that
the export demand, at the time of giving
the order, was about IS per cent. of what il
had been at the CORES bonding time in the
year previous, the object of the Joint resalu
ton was defeated by directing stoppsge of
the coinage, that object being to supply
export demand, not to take away the supply.
The secretary's action suggests such hostility
to the silver dollar as will brook US coinage
of 1t In any form whatever.
Taking the combined movement of coin
and bullion, both gold and silver, in the IL
years we have specified, the EXHIBIT IS as fol-
lows: Domestic exports, 1898, $50, 1928; ex-
ports of imports, $l10,9 i6 374: total exports,
1904 BOG. 702; imports, S2i5.0f7 .266i excess of
exports over imports, $3.50 259, 436-an ad-
verse balance which certainly does not prop
up our power to resume specie payments,
nor afford hopeful outlook.