Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-06-25
Mr.. BAR on Standard of value-AGn n

Mr.. Blair on Standard Of Value-Agn'n.
LEWIS VI. BLAZE. Esq favors our readers
this morning with another OF his articles
on the subject of q standard OF values.
We have room only to comment briefly.
Mr.. BLAIR saws there can no more be a
standard of value than standard oil
beauty, or taste. or religion. Why not
He answers: "Beca1se value. beauty,
taste. and religion are simply qualities or
conditions of mind" &c. &c. Bat he
shoots wide OF the marx. Beauty, taste,
aud religion have neither weight nor d.
mensions. neither body nor shape. and
therefore -not for the reason given by Mr..
BLAIR oGHaO' have standard nor serve es
:; andard. Ii shows what sort OF diem
ma Sir. BLAIR Is in whea We find II noces-
sary 10 quote the Federal Constitution IN
arguing the point with him. That instru-
merit provides:
"Ihc Congress sbsll have power 70 coin
moncy. regulate the value thereof aad VI foreign
colu and Ok the standard Of weights and mea-
sGrc'.'
All these things Congress can do. Men
can weigh god AID silver. but not love,
DC. Men can measure wheat, but cannot
measure love beauty, or religion. And 50
the fathers were not unwlse enough 20 NV
10 do. or authorize TO be done, or allow to
be done. ~ impossible thing. As the pros
perI,y Of joke lies IN the car of him that
hears. not on the tongue of HIM that tells
il, so beauty is subjective. not objective.
II IS the lover that sees what he calls
beauty where other persons SEQ no
such thing. or coTfss that sort OF thing
cannot be weighed nor meaen'ed. But
surely that fact does not prove that gold
and SILVER cannot be weighed.
Mr.. BLAIR confounds the estimate which
Its owner puts upon gold with the ralre OF
gold. Hence his argument falls 10 the
ground. JoNEs does not place high esti-
mate upon gold and Brown does. There
fore. argues Mr. BLAZE, there can bc no
gold standard of values. As well argue
that there is no such thing as gold. The
varying estimates when men place upon
gold have nothing to DO with the question
MIR. BLAIR Is discussing not one whit
moro than the varying uses - which men
pat gold have 20 DO with the question OF
the possibility of a standard of vaIues
VIC say TO Nj. BLAZE that standard OF
values, 40 called. is not standard in the
sense in which it il true that the sum of
two aud two will always be four. or that
the square Of the hypotenuse Will always
be equal to the sum of the squares of tho
other two sides Of right-angled triangle.
or that triangular circles unthlnKable. \
standard OF values Is whatever the govern
ment by law declares 10 he such STANDARD,
Just rs the law of the land - whatever
the Supreme Court of the Unite! States
says il l.. The law NAV be changed. Tie
standard may be changed rs II mas been
changed ~ this country. Never heiess. as
long rs II is standard it il he standard
and Is standard Of values. Mr.. Btnn
admits the truth Of our contention when
he SAYS that flexible voluntary standards
do exist.
What Mr.. BLAIR saws. in commenting
upon our remarl; concerning JoNEs, needs,
we think, no reply. Mr.. BLAIR stands, we
suppose. so far as that point ia concerned,
rs Mr. BENTON stood when he introduced
the expunging resolution into the United
States Senate" solitary and alone" Nr.
BLAZE SAYS that common sense will make
JoNfs conform his bushel to the current
bushel." and his coins to the current
CONS. The current bushcl" and the
current coins are IN this country the ones
fixed by law. In other words. here Is tho
standard of values gold and the standard
Of measures Nhe busheD.
And here. allow us TO remark in conclu-
sion, Mr.. BLAIR ought to make his opinion
conform to ours, or rather TO the facts.