The representative. [volume] (St. Paul, Minn.) 1893-1901, 1895-01-09
A SENSIBLE REPLY.
Two Questions on Money by Ex'
Senator Farwel.

Chicago Times.
We have received from valued cor
respondent the following query:
To the Editor.
In your editorial columns Of today
you say: "The only currency reform
that will reform is one that provides
for the equally free coinage Of gold and
silver and the issuance of all paper
money by the national government"
Will you kindly inform your readers,
of whom am one, whether you want
gold and silver coined at the present
ratio Of 16 to l, which was the market
value at the time the law was passed
fixing this ratio. or do you favor coin
ing them at their present market
value of 81 to !? Will you also inform
me how the government can issue
paper money? 1t can not lend money
as banks do. How, therefore, can
paper money be gotten into the hands
of the people? Your very truly,
G. B. FARWELL.
Mr.. Farwell's latter question may be
answered first. The government gets
paper or other money into the hands
Of the people by paying its bills. The
expenditures of the government for
1895 are estimated at $44, 427 ,74S. 1t is
of course, through these expenditures
that new money, Of whatever class,
passes from the government to the
people.
We believe that free coinage of gold
and silver at any rate fixed by the gov
ernment, be it Is to l or higher ra-
ito, would keep the prices of those
metals at that ratio in open market.
What Mr.. Farwell calls their present
market value is not their market value
at all. Under present conditions the
price of gold is fixed by law. The price
of silver is left subject to the whims
of an open market, with a powerful
hostile interest actively engaged in
discrediting it for it's chief use-name-
ly, as money-and in preventing any
increase in the demand for it for such
purpose.
TO say that the natural value of sill
yer is only one thirty-fourth that of
gold because under existing condi-
tionS, the prices of the two metals
bear about that relation, is as illogical
as it would be two say that there is
| less respect for the moral law in the
| United States than in Dahomey, be-
cause punishment for it's violations of
it are more common here than there.
| The error in the first inference lies in
| overlooking the fact that the law puts
gold and silver upon an entirely differ
ent footing in the market. The error
in the latter case is in ignoring the
fact that in the United States men are
adjudged law breakers for offenses
which in Dahomey or any other saw
age state are passed over as matters
| of course.
II our CORES pondent suggests that
the 16 to ratio may be as artificial as
the "a to l ratio, we must agree with
him. The chief support for the form
er is that is the ratio easily and nat
urally maintained by the two metals
when they stood upon the same foot
ing. To get the exact natural ratio
now, without testing it by the free
coinage of silver at the old ratio, il
would be necessary to demonetize gold
shut off all demand for it for currency
purposes, and leave it, like silver, tC
be subjected to the price-fixing power
of the demand for its use by jewellers
gold-smiths, and the smaller or semi
civilized nations. Does our cores
pondent think that under such condi
lions the price of gold would still be
81 times that of silver?