The great West. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1889-18??, 1891-08-14
Ie7o-lseo.
The Purchasing Power of Money Then
and Now.


The Purchasing Power OF Money Then
and Now.
Sir: With your permission, desire
to consider with your readers the pur-
chasing power of money-say 500 for
convenience-in 1870, when we had
about $40 circulating money for each
Individual of our population-then
about 40, 900. 900 in number-and the
value of purchasing power of 500 in
1891, with about 81. 40 for each indiv-
idual in the union-now numbering
over 60, OOO 900, writes cor. of the
Geneva Record. Remembering that
the wants and demands of this large
increase of population naturally calls
for an increase of money pro rata, we
may argue safely from the figures and
this natural demand, and arrive at a
just conclusion, and answer the ques-
ton, Which is best much or little
money?
That the proposition may be clear,
and its demonstration true, we will
suppose that Geneva county farmer
came to town in 1870, and having sold
his cotton at 80 cents per pound, found
that he had 800 to expend. He buys
l Dbl -four. $12; 80 lbs coffee, $3.50;
100 lbs bacon, $1S; 25 lbs lard, IS;
pair shoes, So; pair shoes for wife,
So; suit of clothes, $25; 2 calico
dresses GO yards) $3.50: 80 yards
homespun, $3.50; pillow hoes, So; 1
stock, IS; 2 wedding hoes, 81; pocket
knife, SLIGO; 5 lbs tobacco S.; l set
plates, $3.50; set cups and saucers,
81. 40.
This takes his 500; and supposing
that his cotton weighed 500 pounds,
he goes home with $50 surplus.
In 1891 he returns, sells a bale OF
cotton weighing 500 pounds at cents,
netting $50. Meanwhile the money
circulating has been reduced from $40
per each individual to s.. 40, and he
finds that the shrinkage in values for
what he needs to buy has not fallen off
in just proportion. For his flour he
must pay Sc; bacon IS; coffee Sc; lard,
s.; 2 pair shoes, 81; suit clothes, $15;
2 dresses, $3.50; homespun, 50. So;
plows, $3.50; pocket knife, 81; tobac-
co, So; plates, 75c. cups and saucers,
Toe.
Upon summing up he finds that he
is just $13. so short Of money enough
to pay for the same goods bought in
1870, which, added to the $50 surplus
carried home that year, shows a loss
of purchasing power of money then
and now of $780,, or nearly 100 per
cent. Or, to be palmer, the difference
between prices then and now would
have enabled the farmer to have
doubled his purchases.
Of course this is an extreme case
a case where cotton was exceptionally
high, due to some extent to the short
crop-about 4,50O, 600 bales, but was
more largely due to the abundance of
greenbacks, which at that period were
in the zenith of their popularity and
good results.
The records of congress show that
from 1867 to 1877, continuous war was
waged by bankers, corporations, syn
dicates and by foreign capitalists
against monetary system which gave
liberty and profit to the laborer, until
by a succession of crimes against the
people and greenbacks Uincoln's ex-
ceptional clause, the redemption and
funding bill, and a half dozen infamous
schemes for making gold paramount),
the circulating medium has dropped to
81. 40 per capita, trade is restricted,
progress, enterprise, and ability to
consume are handicapped, while pro-
ductiOn is stimulated that much may
be made to meet the redemption in
value of our chief product.
BY little examination of the his
tory of our financial system, it will be
found that commercial success, and
the success of the farmer have been
measured as much or more during the
past twenty years by the amount Of
money in circulation than by excess
of production, which will be claimed
by those who may not have considered
the matter from the records and the
facts. From a study of these elements
OF knowledge, any one not willfully
blind to truth must arise satisfied that
had the financial policy of the gov
eminent been to the improvement Of
the greenback system-ignoring ma
tional banks and the clamor of inter-
ested capitalists and shrewd specula-
tors-much of that public distress and
private suffering which now hang so
threateningly over the land, so album
dant in fertility, so blessed in re-
sources, would not be found paralyz-
ing industry, Gripping endeavor and
blighting the erstwhile prosperous and
happy homes of the people.
A Gentle Reminder.
The Economist would respectfully
call the attention Of President Harri