Richmond dispatch. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1884-1903, 1893-06-01
The Per Oanlta Humbng.

| We said the other day that we were
ready 10 pronounce average high-water,
, the average state of tho weather. the
1 average number OF deaths, and various
other such averages as humbugs. These
averages mean nothing and can teach no.
thing. Some Of our contemporaries VINO
concur with Us as T. the worthlessness OF
such averages nevertheless refuse to apply
their arguments to the average amount Of
currency IN the country. The Populist or
1blrd.party platform, for instance. as It
appears III the Richmond Sun. demands
that the circulating medium be speedily
increased TO not less than so per capita.
We find an answer to this demand in the
! following paragraph from the Wilmington
! On. c. Star. We quote:
There mover wore tS) more deceptive
phrases invented than the per capita and per
cent. humbugs which are ugsd 10 shOT the
amount OF money la circulation and to show the
/ industrial progress made by a country or by auy
given &c mon Of It, Estimating the population
OF this country IN ROAD numbers AZ GO,00 1000
aui the aggregate wealth at sj0,000,0)0,0oO
the financial stGtls.iciah will tell rs that this
represents pnr capita wealth OF $1,000.
{
sands OF people wDo couldn't raise small change
enough 10 buy breakfast, and a majority Of
| the people never cwn0I that much money at
/ one time. What thcn docs tho pr capita in this
I case moanf Simply nothing. There 10 no per
! capita about II. l. a means anything II means
that II THIS aggregate wealth wore equally Ill
/ Vided there is enough OF II to give every person
/ IN the country one thousand dollars. But 1t Is
not equnny diyiioi, aud 1t - no. going 10 be-
/ The reader would naturally infer from
! the line of reasoning followed IN the fore
/ gong paragraph that our Wilmington con-
! temporary regards the Populist demand
! above quoted as a humbuc. But not SO.
/ That paper maintains that the amount OF
| circulating medium Is too small. or. IN
other words, holds that the per capita
amount Of currency is too small. We ask
| the star to apply MS own reasoning to the
/ case before us. What does the per capita
/ of currency mean: There is and can be
ne per capita about it, III it means
ANYTHING il means that if the aggregate
I wealth OF the country were equally divided
/ there is enough OF it TO give every person
+ a thousand dollars" But II is not equal
/ ~ divided and is not going 10 be-" In
/ this sonse there is no such thing as peT capl-
/ "a. 1t is per capita humbUg. That's AL.
! A man may have million of dollars locked
/ up whilst his neighbogs are as poor as
church mice" And if this per capita of
/ currency were increased to nifty dollars,
or hundred dollars. or g thousand dol
lars, the impecunious man would still have
empty pockets and the millionaire
would still have his millions, as
| is abVndantly illustrated and proven
I by the face that the Massachusetts,
per capita is at present about $3.50 and
the North Carolina PEI capita only about
81. and yet there is more suffering III Masss-
ohusetts than in North Carolina. The
SGr SAYS truly that there are no two
States IN which tho per capita is the sans
aud that tho bulk OF the currency IS
monopolized by comparatively few per-
sons, from whom others can get 1t only by
paying interest. And this will forever re-
main true. Tho rich need no higher per
capita. The poor cannot get higher per
cspite. Money cannot be put mo the
rockets of thoSs who need i. by putting
1t into the pockets Of those who do Rot
need il.