The Wichita daily eagle. [volume] (Wichita, Kan.) 1890-1906, 1891-07-01
ONE OF THE 1.-TWO GREAT CUES
TONS

In the editorial 1.-The Two Great Cues
TONS in your issue Of June 18th, you
refer in a conspicuous way to the artl-
cles have sent to the EAGLE on the
subjects of coinage and tariff, and IN
manner calculated to give your readers
a wrong impression, both of myself and
the subjects under consideration.
Although l have been for thirty years q
resident of New York city, my business
there has been professional, not that OF
banking or manufacturing; neither have
[ in any way been interested in any
business that high tariff, or the free
coinage of silver would effect, any more
or as much as it would my farming
interest in Kansas. In fact, my business
in New York is practically closed up and
| am now writing more as farmer IN
Kansas. than I am as a resident OF New
York city.
l do not know, however, why banker
in Wall street may not have just
as correct ideas of money or
as a manufacture in New England as
sound views of the tariff. as an unedu-
Gated farmer, found among the Gypsum
hills of Barber county, Kansas, or the
editor of a farmer paper. Jeremiah
| Simpson" the man who now represents
! the congressional district in which you
reside, and. Senator PETER, one Of the
! senators of your state are advocates or
ssfree coinage" ''free trade and ''fiat
money"
What has mans residence to do any
way with the facts, figures and argu-
ments he produces on these two great
questions of money and tariff? Consider
them, not the locality they come from.
! 1t is very true that the men who are
most active in securing free and I'M
limited coinage Of silver, are
the senators from Colorado, Ne
vada, Idaho and California, all sill
yer producing states. These senators
all advocates of free coinage urge, as a
reason for so doing that the people want
more money. But what l claim is that
free coinage will give the people less IN
stead of more money; that you cannot
by free coinage keep gold and silver coin
! in circulation as money when the bull
lion in the dollar of one is at premium
over the bullion in the dollar of the
other, in any other way than by COM
puIsory coinage. The very day you
adopt free coinage of both metals the
coin made of the metal that is at a pre-
MUM over the other will go out of cir
culation, for the reason that coin Is
worth more to sell as bullion in the mar
ket than it is to use as money, and the
people holding it will sell it. As stated
bv your correspondent, Mr.. Lockwood,
Al e oil, Ia
ponds upon the supply and demand of
the bullion out of which the coin Is
made.
From the organization of the minis up
to 1873 we had substantially free and
unlimited coinage of both metals. Dur
ing that whole period or the greater por-
ton of it, the bullion in the silver
dollar was at a premium over
the bullion in the gold dollar, as a result
of this, only about 8,045, 900 silver dol
lars were coined The production or
supply of gold and silver in this country,
and in the world, shows why the supply
of silver coin was so small. Since 1878
gold bullion has been at premium, yet
the act of 1878 had little or nothing to
do with causing that premium. 1t was
the relative production of gold and silver
in this country, and in other countries,
that sent gold to premium. Let me
give you the facts on this point, which
should convince every reader OF the
EAGLE as to the truth of the position
taken on this question. In the Statistical
Abstract of the United States for 1889,
on page 40, will be found a table giving
the production of gold and silver in the
United States from 1913, the year gold
was discovered in California, to 1888.
Previous to 1913 but very little of either
gold or silver was obtained in this coun-
try. By the figures in the table it will
be found that during the twenty-five
wears from 1S48 to 1878 this country
produced 81, 240, 100000 of gold and
only $3.50. ESQ. 900 of silver, showing
that we produce $1,051, 700, 900 more
gold than silver. and it was this large
supply of gold, and small supply of sill
yer, that made gold worth less than sill
yer and it was the premium on silver
that prevented It's coinage. A further
examination of this table shows the fol-
lowing facts: In 1S4S the production of
gold was $40. 600, 000 while that of silver
was only $4,000 The supply of gold
increased from $4,000, 600 in 1S4S to
$40. O00. 900 in 1919, TO $50, 10000 in
1850. to So. coo. 900 in 1851. to SOC, 000,-
600 in 1852. to $50, coo, 900 in 1853, when
it reached the highest point in the his
tory of the country. Since that time 1t
has been gradually declining. In 1878 it
had gone down TO $50 900, 600; and in
1888 it declined to $50 600, 600, its lowest
point In 1889 it was $32, 500, 900, which
was less than one half the production of
1853. The production OF gold in the
United States previous to 1o4S was S24,-
$50, 1853
Now what has been the production of
silver previous TO 1S4S: Only about
500, 900 worth Of silver had been pro-
duced in the United States From 1913
to 1857 inclusive the annual production
is reported at $50 600 In 1878 it ran up
to $500. coo. and from that time to 1878,
il gradually increased until that year it
reached $50. 30. coo. which was only
$50, 600 less than the production of gold.
III 1874 the production of sill
yer was S31. 399, 600, while that
of gold was only S33. 500 900, silver
surprising gold in production by $500,
coo. The production Of silver has since
been gradually increasing. until in 1889
it reached S64. $40, 600 while that OF gold
was only S32 500. 600 silver thus surpasS-
ing gold in production by S3l, $4,000
yearly: nearly two dollars of silver To
one of gold. From 1883 to 1889 the pro-
duction of silver in this country has been
$G75. 162. Cos, while that of gold has been
bat Sj42, 3l3. ISL; silver thus surprising
gold in production by 1872 $40, 0S2.
It viii be noticed that while the pro-
duction Of gold declined from its highest
point In 1853 to nearly one-half IN 1913,
.il--.-1. .r-crnnsnl a--ri..-- that r.rLnA nNer