The advocate and Topeka tribune., 1893-01-04
SILVER AND GOLD STANDARDS.

OlhGmpGOn'S article on the double stand
ard, refers to our criticism upon its idea
Of "measure and standards" as fol-
lows:
The explanation is simple, governor.
We measure different things by the diff
ferent standards and we don't measure
any one thing by the two standards, 1t
makes no difference, as our valued con-
temporary implies, whether the foot rule
is composed OF walnut or pine, but it
must be twelve inches in length in order
to be common standard Of length.
Neither does it make any difference
whether a dollar is of gold, silver or pa
per to be q measure OF value, provided in
the first two cases it contains standard
quantity of intrinsic value snd that it
represents it in the other case. We
should certainly use our silver as cur
rency, but we cannot see why at the rate
OF 15b to l when the market ratio is
251@ to /. The history of the United
States is full of warning and instruction
on the point.
We congratulate our esteemed con-
temporary for thus virtually admitting
that such a thing as "double standard"
of coin is possible. 1t opened the debate
with this inquiry:
Will our esteemed and distinguished
contemporary explain how it is possible
TO have two standards of anything.
Our neighbor now admits the correct
ness of the double standard idea, but it
still clings with tenacity to the idea of
"intrinsic value" of the metals. In pur-
suance Of that idea it says:
One of the principol objections to what
is called double standard Is that it
would inevitably restrict the volume of
the currency; while single standard
permits and favors the circulation of
both metals, as under the prevailing sys
tenn in this country. Put 100 cents worth
of silver behind every dollar certificate
and both gold and silver will be used to
the furthest limit in the currency.
Again we thank our contemporary for
its wisdom in departing from its former
idea that there is no such thing as
double standard, but we remind it that
it's statement that double standard
would restrict the volume OF currency"
"while a single standard faVors the cir
culation Of both metals, is hardly in
consonance With the facts of history or
the opinions of those who have made
coinage affairs their special study. In
the same article contemporary claims
that during the period when silver and
gold we're standards of money value in
the United States, during the admins
trstion of President Jefferson, gold ad-
vancsd 2 per cent and the coinage OF
silver ceased. "In 1884 new ratio OF
16 to was established and we had alb
solute and unlimited coinage of both
metals up to 1873" Then by some ho-
cus-pocus silver was demonetized! Dur
ing the double standard period and up
to and on the very day the greatest
crime of the century was committed
(excepting the shareholders rebelion),
silver was at q premium of 3 cents
over gold in the markets Of the world,
and, IN consequence, thegovernment pur-
chased gold because it was the cheapest
metal, and from 1884 20 1873 but 7,OOO,-
600 silver dollars were coined. Upon
this state of affairs our esteemed con-
temporary proceeds to argue that we
should "put 100 cents worth Of silver be
hind every certificate" in order that
"both gold and silver will be used to the
furthest limit in the currency"