Salt Lake evening Democrat. [volume] (Salt Lake City, Utah) 1885-1887, 1886-06-09
THE SILVER QUESTION.

National Bi-Metallic Coinage Association,
of which organization the Professor is
Chairman. The address starts out with
the two following reasons for the exist
ence of the association:
First-'ro obtain the restoration, by act
of Congress, of the free and unlimited
coinage of silver, and the continuation OF
the present free and unlimited coinage of
gold.
Second-'The restoration of the "Unit of
Value as enacted by act of Congress, and
approved by President George Washington,
April 2nd, 1892: to be represented by the |
gold dollar of % $40 grains, 300 fine, and |
the silver dollar of il2b grains, 900 fine.
1t then asserts that the persistent |
efforts OF monometalists TO deprive silver
of its constitutional function as money,
are only to further the interests OF
British India at the expense OF, and in
calculable injury TO, the United States OF
America. To prove this somewhat start
ling assertion, the following showing is
made--taking, for example, the article of
wool:
A few years ago the importation of wool
from the British Indies was comparatively
lion pounds are yearly imported into the
United States. The quality in general is ac
ceptible to our requirements, but quality
for quantity compared with our own fleece,
the prices were found too high; hence, East
India wool has been seldom sold in our mar
kets. The cheap price paid for our silver
bullion and the exchange on India regulated
thereby, has of late years allowed the Brit
ish exporters to lay down India wool at
price Mt which honest competition must
cbrinlf from, Strntinn il m
yet that difference of exchange and the un-
warrantable, unfair and decidedly perni-
cious misquotation of the true value of the
East India rupee, has opened source for
an unhealthy, unnatural competition preju-
dicial to our own sheep-raising interests
and only favorable to lndia's at the expense
of Americas.
Exchange on India purchased in London,
of the so-called Council Bills of the East
Indian EXchequer, means shilling pence
per rupee instead of 2 shillings sterling, its
true value in India, which gives the importer
of India wool at the start profit of 33H
per cent. When the invoice reaches Bos-
ton, New York or Philadelphia, the amount
paid is stated in rupees and owing to the
misrepresentation of the true value of the
East India rupee, which is quoted at 81 7-10
cents instead of As cents, its full value legal
tender in India, and acknowledged as such
by the British government, another profit of
over 80 per cent is allowed the importer on
his undervaluation.
To comprehend more fully the legitimate
objections to the importation of wool from
the East Indies at the present time, it be-
comes necessary to give explanatory details
and thereby expose to view the tricks of
trade in connection Herewith. Wool, from
coarse to fine-some very tine-sells in India
mt from 3 to 10 annas, or equivalent in our
money from to 30 cents per pound. An in
voice of 100000 pounds of East India wool
mt 3 annas, or 15 cents per pound, would
show the following results:
One hundred Thousand pounds East India
wool at o annas per pound, 100000 annas:
1G annas make rupee hence, 81 ,250 rupees.
The East India rupee is equal to 2 shillings
English sterling, and it would therefore re-
quire 3, ,125 pounds sterling to cancel that
debt; but owing to the manipulation of the
London market price for our silver bullion
the importer claims from the London Ex-
chequer Council bills on India at l shilling
pence per rupee, and therefore is enabled
to cancel it with 2,3i3 pounds 10 shillings
sterling, at a profit of 1875 per cent, or
equal to 7S1 pounds 3 shillings sterling on
that invoice of East India wool.
Not only is the importer benefited by the
exchange on India, but another advantage
is offered him to undervalue the rupee at
30 7-l0 cents in place of AZ cents, its real
face and full legal tender value in India.
The Boston, Philadelphia or New York i'm
porter of East India wool presents his in
voice to the respective custom houses, and
is obligingly allowed to underyalue his East
India wool another 26 per cent, namely,
100000 pounds at annas per pound 100000
annas, or 81 ,250 rupees; the rupee at 80 7-10
cents reduces that invoice to 1l,156.25, or
Mt the rate of IL l5-l0O cents per pound, and
in consequence thereof pays n duty of 219
cents instead of cents per pound; for the
tariff reads: All woods costing II cents or
less per pound % cents duty; all woods cost
ing more than II cents b cents per pound.
The East India wool importer not only
has the undue advantage of an exchange on
India, but he imports it Mt an undervalua-
tion of 2l6 cents. per pound, or in other
words is allowed to undervalue on an invoice
of 100000 pounds $500, an item worth while
fighting for, and which i'll n measure ex-
plains the tenacity with which the importers
in New York, Philadelphia and Boston de-
mand the suspension of silver coinage. In
consequence the imports and stocks of East
India wool have increased from the almost
insignificant portion to the vast proper
tions given in the annual circular of one OF
the leading importers of wool in Boston, i. e..
over 100 per cent. in the past three years.
The Act OF July %, 1876, unconsti
tutionally demonetized silver, and though
its intrinsic value is as great as ever, foi
the purposes OF trade and barter Will
foreign nations, it is, in degree, value
less, while similar coin, held at its truC
value IN another country, can be made Il
work untold hardship to our commercial
interests, and all for the selfish ends OF
few who compose the money kings OF the
country.
What is true OF wool is equally SO o
wheat, corn, rice, hides, and all othel
products OF that remarkable country
where labor and the cost of living are
ninety per cent. less than in this country
The address adds; elias Congress tn,
right to demonetize the trade dollar?'
and answers the question as follows
"Money," at common law, is both golt
and silver, and both gold and silver wer,
legal tender at common law at the time o
the adoption of the Constitution.
Gold and silver derive their legal tende
function not from Congress, not even di
rectly from the Constitution but from tn,
immemorial common law recognized in thi
regard and sanctioned by the Constitution
This being the case, has Congress til,
right to take away from any gold or silve
coin, or either of them, this legal-tende
function?
If Congress has the right to take ava,
from the trade dollar or any other silye
coin its legal tender function, it woull
naturally have the right to do the same witt
the gold dollar or any other gold coin of th
United States, or rs TO both gold and silve
coins together.
This position cannot be successfully as