The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1890-08-12
ANOTHER LESSON In HISTORY.

ANOTHER LESSON IN HlSiOhI-
The Tenth Census of the United States,
vol.VIl, page s, shows that during ten years
of free trade the wealth Of this country
more than doubled, while the wealth OF
each inhabitant increased 5000. The
same authority shows that during ten
years of protection the wealth of this coun-
try increased only 43 per cent, while the
wealth of each inhabitant increased only
So.
Every other day our unesteemed morn
ing contemporary devotes a column or two
TO explaining this remarkable fact. We
give below the results of its latest attempt.
The Tribune maintains that the reason
the United States doubled its wealth be
tween 1850 and 1860, under free trade, was
that the country produced so much gold,
that gold fell in value. Also that the rea-
son the prosperity declined to a % per cent.
increase under protection from 1870 to 1880,
as compared with a 100 per cent. increase
under free trade, was that the country
produced SO much silver that silver fell in
value more than gold had fallen in the free
trade decade.
That is, if gold falls in value the country
producing it grows rich; but if silver falls
In value the country producing it grows
poor!
This is what the Tribune calls an ''eXpla-
nation of the fact that wealth increased
twice faster under free trade than under
protection.
And it follows this rare bit of reasoning
with an affected and laborious show of
learning in disquisition about money be-
ing measuring rod. And that since the
measuring rod, gold, has by its scarcity
become longer, therefore gold would pur-
chase more, and hence the country that
produces most-of the gold, i. e., the United
States, would be poorer than if the gold
had not risen in value. 1t then talks in this
strain: "The wealth of the country is not
measured by its gold or silver. 1t Is meas
ured by that property with which men buy
gold and silver" This is true, being the
only bit of correct doctrine in the whole
article. A little over a year ago this same
organ said: 1.-The difference between val
ues and the measure of values is something
that has never penetrated the Uranium Of
The HERALD. All men are work
ing for certain amount of something II
is not for wheat or beef or butter, but fol
that which savage and civilized men alike
recognize as the measure Of values" l. e.
the precious metals.
Which does it mean; that gold and silver
are OF are not the measure of values?
If gold and silver are the measure Of
values, the United States should have in
creased as fast in wealth from 1870 to 1855
as from 1850 to 1850.
If they are not the measure of values
and wealth depends upon other products
then the whole argument of the Tribune il
worthless.
To cover up Its defeat, the Tribune flies +
MULHALL, the British statistician, to SHOW
how much faster this country has increases
in wealth under protection THAI Englan
has under free trade This is what it pre-
tends to get from MULHALL: That th
wealth of the United States has increase
from SO 800 000, 900 in 1870 to e., $50, 600, 90
in 1880, while the total wealth of Grea
Britain increased from eS 80, 900, 600 in 1S7
to Is, 800, 100000 in 1889. This is what
Republican writer in the Encyclopedi
Britannica says MULuALL gives. MULHA1
himself, however, on page 40 of his Dit
tionary of Statistics, gives the wealth of th
two countries as follows:
Millions 6 Per Inhab.
1870. 1882 1870. lSS
United States-7.O74 947s 1sl II
United Kingdom $3.50 $40 2l5 q
Increase from 1870 to 1850 per capita:
United states
United Kingdom
That is, CUR total national wealth in is,
was $50, SO 090, 900, which ten years of pr,
lection had increased by 1880 10 S47, 375
100000 The total increase is less than 4
per cent The wealth per inhabitant ws
S905 in 1870, which had increased to $40 i
1850. The increase per head under te
years OF protertjon was $50
The total wealth of the United Kingdo
in 1870 was S34, coo, 900, 600 and in 1880 it W,
S420oG, GoG,000. The wealth per head in Is
was sl,975 and in 1850 it was 81, 200, an i,
crease of sl25 per head in Great Britain, /:
compared with an increase of SIS per hes
ia tie United States.
So plUSh for MULEALL, which the Tiibu
pretended to quote in such fool hardy has
in Order to escape from the question
issue, whether the United States bad pro
pered more under free trade or protecii.,
The United States census, compiled by Il
publicans, showed that the wealth per be:
hadincressed two and one-third times fast
under free trade than under protectio
The Tribune was not satisfied with tie ce
sus figures of our own country, and flew
MULHALL's figures in its efforts to escar
MULRALL's figures show that the weai
per head in free trade Great Britain is
creasing nearly four times faster than
our own protected country. 1t is not
question of totals, but OF how many t
total is to be divided among. TIE chief j
crease Of wealth in the United States a
corGing to Mul.pALL and our census ;nu
come from immigration. as the increase y
head is small indeed. But the wealth P
head in little England, nvercroyyded as it
goes OF Increasing at a faster ratio frc
year to year.
TIE EAGLE Rock Timss, as are othe
of the Idaho newspapers, is s'catchi
on to TIE disreputable character of @
morning contemporary. The Times say
'sLast Sunday the Salt Lake liar (Tri5,1l
took back in their editorial columns the
fa,nonc fa1sehood ahopt Mnr1..x T.xr