Morning journal and courier., 1886-03-23
COMMUNICATIONS.


 COMMUNICATIONS.
 Are the Interests of Laborer Identi-
 cal With Those of Bondholder4 To the Editor of the JOURNAL COURIER: As an illustration of the small amount of thought required by person, in accord with popular superstition, to obtain 8 reputation as an economist" thss following letter is worth reading:
 ''In recent article in the Sun entitled the Cry of the Savings Bank Presidents, and in opposition to their petition against the fur ther coinage of silver, I find the following:
 "'What the petitioners fear is evidently the depreciation of deposits, which they think would be caused by the victory of the silver standard. They assume that the dol lars which are now worth 125 cents would sink to 100 cents, and depositors would lose the difference
 t'In thus asserting or assuming that there are, or may be, two kinds of dollars in cir culation, one worth 125 cents and the other 100 cents, you effectually knock out, it seems to me, from under the advocates of further or unlimited silver coinage every support to their position. Let us reason about it a lit tie.
 "When any person, more especially one who depends upon the results of each day s toll to meet each days needs, earns dollar
 
 titled to receive7 ManifestIy the very best dollar. Manifestly, further, the laborer or bread earner whoever he may be or wher ever he may live in all this great country, can now have the best dollar of 125 cents (purchasing power) just as readily and 7cheaply as he can have the other kind of 8 dollar, presently or prospectively worth less and he can continue to have it just long as nothing is done to impair the power of the national treasury to exchange silver for gold on demand. Now why should the laborer be willing to abate anything of this privi- leges And is not the man who advocates a policy whereby the laborer is compelled to receive a dollar inferior to the best infiicting an injury upon him? Is he not the working mans enemy?
 '.Again the laboring man is told that he should favor free or continued coinage of silver, because the gold bugs don't want Silver. But is not the argument based on such an averment all the other way? A gold bug is one who is credited with knowing all about money and looking sharp after his own interests. We'll, if the gold bug is satisfied that gold dollar is best for him, and the Ia borer can have gold dollar for every one hundred cents that are due him, as he now can for the asking, why are not the interests of the gold bug and the laborer one and the same2 It is good reason because the gold bug wants roast beef and plum pudding that the laboring man should be asked to content himself with brown bread and raw turnips? Can you furnish me or your readers with 8 pair of spectacles that will make this busi- ness of continued silver coinage look differ entlya f'DAvID A. WELLS"
 Norwich, March, 1Ss6"
 In the first paragraph of what he is pleased to call treason" MT. Wells informs us that laborer can get a dollar worth 125 cents just as readily and cheaply" as one worth 100 cents This statement necessarily i'm ,,Ji hot 1oh nht al lars, worth 125 cents each, for a week wages as he could obtain for the same labor if those dollars were worth only 100 cen s each. If this assumption were true 125- cent dollars would clearly be to a laborer's interest. Furthermore, it would be to the workman's interest to so conduct the curren- cy that dollar would be worth 150 or 200 cents.
 The only difficulty with MT. Wells as- sumption is that it is not true. The number of dollars paid laborer for weeks wages depends on the value of each one of those dollars. The higher the value of the dollar the smaller the number of those dollars paid for given amount of work. Hence there is no truth in the assertion that 125 cent dol lars can be had as ''cheaply'' as dollars worth 100 cents each. Employers are not in the business of giving 125 cents' worth of money the value of a dollar the greater the number of hours labor must be given Tn exchange for one.
 Mir. Wells next informs us that "the inter ests of the gold bug and the laborer are one and the same." That is, the interests of the owners of the eight thousand millions of na- tional, State, municipal and railroad bonds are identical with the interests of those whose labor must directly or indirectly pay both interest and principal of those bonds. Is this true?
 If every one of the tdollars," which in the aggregate form this vast public debt, is wor; h 100 cents, and at the same time average days wages is worth 100 cents, then eight thousand million days labor will pay these bonds. But if we increase the value of each one of the ''dollars'' constituting those bonds to 125 cents, then it will require ten thou sand millions of days work to discharge this debt By increasing the value of a dollar to 125 cents ths bondholders have increased the value of their bonds to the extent of two thousand millions of days labor. Are the interests of those who are to receive this ex- tra two thousand millions of days work identical with the interests of those upon whom this additional burden has been laid and who must pay it from reduced wagesa The laborers of this country owe 8 great number of "dollars." When this debt was created each one of these "dollars" repre- sented certain number of hours labor. Is it to the laborers' interest to increase the number of hours work which must be paid for dollar and thus increase the amount of work which will have to be performed to cancel said debt2
 Mir. Wells argues that when the meaning of the term 'one dollar" is so changed that it really means 125 cents, those who owned or had due them thousands of millions of those "dollars" do not profit by such a I change any more than those who had no 1 'idollars'' on hand, and who must buy these enhanced dollars by giving more hours work for each one of them. He labors to per | suade us that when debt of one hundred dollars is changed by sly legislation to q debt of one hundred and twenty-five dollars the creditor and the debtor have the same l interest in this rascality.
 | Mr. Wells omits stating the vital point that when legislation practically changed the l meaning of the term Tone dollar," the nun. 1 Der of those dollars paid for a weeks or 8 | years wages was diminished, but the mum Der of those dollars due the owners of evi | dences of debt remained unchanged. l Mr. Wells and his co-laborers are like Louis XVI A revolution is in progress and they are oblivious of the fact The Ameri can people have fairly begun to think fol themselves. Shallow pretenders to com plete knowledge of political economy will nc longer be able to mislead us as in recent I years. JOHN P. PHILLIPS.