People's party paper. [volume] (Atlanta, Ga.) 1891-1898, 1893-12-15
Carlisle and the Double Standard.


New York Press,
In his speech at the Chamber of
Commerce dinner on Tuesday night,
the Secretary Of the Treasury said :
8" have never been able to under
stand what is meant by.a double
measure of value, and | have never
found any one who could tell me. "
The Secretary has been most unfor-
tunate, both In his studies and in his
acquaintances. There are few au-
tboritative works upon finance in
which the matter is not explained,
so that even much less %omprehen-
sive mind than the Secretary's could
understand it. He may discover in
Ievons, for example, not only clear
statement of the case for the double
standard, but a demonstration of its
practicability which he will find it
hard to overthrow. Alexander Ham
ilton explains the double standard in
his famous report upon the Mint, and
so plainly that Jefferson accepted his
argument and the American people
put the system into operation, main
tanning it for nearly one hundred
years, Mr.. Balfour lately said that
there is not in Europe or America an
eminent economic teacher over sixty
years OF age who is not a bimetallist
that is, an advocate of the double
standard. There are wells of knowl-
edge, therefore, from which Mr.. Car
Isle may drink if he will. The trouble
with him, it may he feared, is that he
is not really thirsty for that kind of
information.
At the French Monetary Confer
ence in 1869, Baron Rothschild said
at is the general mass of the two
metals gold and silver} combined,
which serves as the measure of the
value of things" He added with a
significance not then realized as it is
now; "The suppression OF silver
would amount to a veritable destruc-
ton of values without compensation"
1t must be evident that if all values
rest upon all money, the practical an
initiation Of half the money will de-
crease values. In other words, the
remaining money will have its value
so much enhanced that by compare
tive scarcity that a greater quantity
of commodities win be required to
get it, y ~ 4
When both metals are employed
as tull legal tender, the debtor has
an option to pay in either. Now it
is true that the values of gold and
silver are rarely equal. But when
silver, for example, is little cheaper,
the demand, under bimetallism, Is
concentrated upon it by the desire of
debtors to gain the advantage. This
tends to advance the value of the
metal, while, the demand being taken
from gold, that metal necessarily de-
clines in price. The total result is
to produce an equilibrium. This
theory appears to be sound, and the
practice of the world for centuries
has proved it to be so. nder this
system gold and silver have kept
close together when the excess pro
duction of one or the other was far
greater than it is at the present time.
Doubtless, as Jevons remarks, with
the double standard either gold or
silver is the standard at some given
moment; but doubtless, also, both
together insure such stability for both
and for the values of all other COM
modities as cannot be had by use Of
one metal alone. The production of
the precious metals is not susceptible
OF regulation like the production OF
potatoes. 1t is largely dependent
upon chance. But the chances of a
sufficient supply for human needs are
at least doubled by using both metals
rather than one, and the chances that
values Of commodities will have fixed
ness are thus also increased.
Mr.. Carlisle thinks it is enough for
the purpose OF commerce that silver
shall be used for money as we now
use it. But we have the single gold
standard, under which even the value
OF silver is measured by gold; and
with this arrangement silver stands
with paper money, dependent upon
gold; with the result that all prices,
including that OF silver, fall as gold
advances. If this extraordinary
movement, which never appeared
until the civilized world adopted the
single gold standard, can be explain
ed in any other manner, mankind will
welcome the attempt. The facts are
indisputable and We believe that no
other explanation of them is possible.
Nor viii there be any cessation of
the operation of the destructive force
until there shall be general return to
that use OF the double standard which
was employed by the most highly
civilized nations until late in modern
times.