The midland journal. (Rising Sun, Md.) 1885-1947, 1894-09-14

EDITOR JoURNAL:-Gour comment some weeks
ago on article from the Financier wherein you
say "a fall of $50 per cent in the price of prop
erty means a rise in money of so per cent" is not
quite plain to me.
\ farm some years ago was worth $4,000, now
it is worth $40 The decline in the price of the
property as measured by money, has been 1913
per cent. The $4,000 will exchange for 1878 per
cent more property than the $4,000 will exchange
for. The owner of the farm has traded it for
money. The money is $3.50 per cent higher in
price, as measured by property than it was when
the same farm had exchanged for 1873 per cent
more of the same money few years before. The
price of the farm depends on the necessity of its
utilization and such necessity has increased, or at
least has not decreased. There is no more land
than formerly farm products have not increased
out of proportion to the natural demand, or more
properly speaking, they have not increased be-
You'd the peoples necessity of consumption, hence
the price of the farm should not have declined
and would not according to natures laws.
But right here the thing called money steps in
and not only brides the laws of nature, but binds
with clankess chains its sole creator. 1t does not
change the real price of property, but says II am
the price within myself" and by money all things
are measured else exchange must cease. Then
that great law of supply and demand which is as
natural as life itself comes forward to rule the
roost, and by that law money, which is the meas
of all things marketed, is made to increase OF
to decrease in value The necessity of farms and
farm products has not grown less and ifthey have
declined in their real worth we must brand the
law of supply and demand lie.
Then where this change of the relative value OF
the money and the farm? 1t can only be found
in the value of money, which has increased the
S311a per cent, caused by a lack ofsupply.
A. II. Tyson.
Our correspondent has made mistake
i'll his arithmetic. The farm which for
merly cost SIS, 900 now sells for SI2, 900,
which is fall in price of 335 per cent.
We will suppose the farm contains 100
acres. There is left of the $4,000 after
purchasing the farm back we will say,
$1,000. This So, 900 dollars will purchase
at the decreased price so additional acres,
which is so per cent more of land added
to the original tract. 1t is evident that
the purchasing power of money has in
creased so per cent although the fall i'll
price of the land has been but 33B per ct.
The problem will appear little palmer
if we suppose wheat is $500 bushel
$500 will pay for three bushels. The
price falls one-third and wheat sells for
66275 cents. The $500 will then pay for
four and one-ha1f bushels, which is so
per cent more wheat If the price falls to
so cents bushel, S. 90 will buy six
bushels. The price has fallen so per
cent but the same $500 will pay for 100
per cent more wheat.
The purchasing power of money in
creases by leaps and bounds amid falling
prices. The salaries fixed ten years ago
or earlier will purchase of every necessity
for the family at least so per cent more
than originally, hence all the salary and
interest drawing class are on the side of
the gold ring, contraction of currency
fall ill prices and hard times to all pro
ducers ofwealtll, but easy times to the fee
salary and interest drawers. The mort
gagged farmer has to raise twice as much
produce at present to pay the interest and
principal as formerly, although the appar-
ent fall in price of his products has been
but so per cent.-ED. JOURNAL.