The daily morning journal and courier., 1895-02-22

| pOHuSJ anu kllG dNeldSC pl lSS NA S'NNAN-
 on the day MT. Cleveland was inaugu-
 rated was $61.99, but on February 16,
 1895, it was $46.23, the decline being 254
 per cent. Wall street surely should not be tncredulous at the thought that other | property has lost less than half as much
 as the property it chiefly handles. On | $5, 900, GOO, 900 Of stocks the decline, at
 $15.76 per share, would be $7SS,0OO,000. And half as large loss in proportion
 on $6, ,OOO 100000 of bonds, and the de-
 cline in railroad securities alone would
 reach $1,268, GOO, 900. But the trusts, in dustrial telegraph and telephone, sleep 1 ing-car, and other such stocks dealt In l here amount to about S1,000, ,000. The average for the most important of
 these was $79.46 March 4, 1893, and has | fallen to $5OS8, loss of about 25 per
 cent, making in market value $2SO, GOO, 1 GOO more. These losses would aggre-
 gate $1, 100000, already more than a l quarter of the distrusted estimate for l all property.
 | Next take farming property; the az | ricultural department reports loss of
 $663, 1000, 900 in two years in the value of
 animals on farms, more than quarter
 of the entire value January 1, 1893. A | like loss on the live stock not on farms, | by the census $617 OOO,O00 in value,
 would be $154,0O0,O0O more. Wheat has
 fallen from 80 cents at New York to 56 l cents, a loss of 30 per cent; cotton has fallen from 912 to 562 cents, loss of SS l per cent: pork from $19.50 to $11,25 per barrel. a loss of 42 per cent. It is not difficult to see that prices of all farms must have been affected by such a fall
 in the chief products, and every one knows of the tremendous decline in real
 estate and the many foreclosures which
 came with the panic of 1893. The farm
 real estate and implements were val
 ued at $13,279, 00O0 GOO in 1890. When the
 chief products have fallen 30 to 40 per
 cent, and the live stock used in connec-
 ton with farms has fallen 25 per cent,
 will any one doubt that the decline In
 farms and implements has been over 10 per cent. If not, this property and all
 live stock together must have lost $2,- 145,OO0OOO in value.
 What is the change in value of manu- factured products, reckoned in the cen sus as represented by $6,524, 100000 of capital? Iron products as whole have fallen 30 per cent, since March l. 1893, and a good many large concerns have been bankrupted Out of the blast fur naces of the United States only 47 per cent. in capacity were in operation Feb- ruary 1. Had this vast iron industry with an eighth of all the manufacturing capital, lost nothing2 Does compari- son of manufacturing stocks, chiefly textile, show no loss? With about an eighth of the hands employed In manu- featuring in November, 1892 reported idle last November, and many others employed part time, there is also the well known fact that a great many con- cerns are now running without profit in hope of better times. Judged by earn ing power it seems quite within reason to infer that manufacturing property has lost about sixth of its value, or $1,OOO, 100000. It cannot be said how much of the value of mines and quar- ries, $1,291, ,OOO according to the cen sus, was included in the manufacturing valuation But some large losses have also been sustained in the property not so included. The silver output, decreas- ing $22, 900 in value in two years, rep resents a loss of at least $220 900 in value of silver mines. In the silver on hand, $500 ,0OO0 900, the decline of ,24 cents per ounce means loss of $1OO, ,000, ,000,
 Already a loss of $5O19, 900, 0OO or more than five-sixths of the supposed loss in value of all property, has been so traced | that the estimate can hardly be consid- | cred unreasonable. Yet only about half | the total property has been considered | There remain other real estate, about | $24,000, ,000,O0O, furniture carriages, etc., | amounting to about $5,0O0, 900 more | steamship property on oceans, lakes and | rivers, of unknown value; merchandise | in stock, 752,O0O,OOO, and other items. Does any one suppose that there has been no decline in such property? If | about $33OOO, ,OO0,OO0 of property already considered has sustained a loss of $5,- 019,0OO,00O, or 15 per cent, is it believa- ble that the $32, ,000 0O0,O remaining of the census valuation has lost less than per cent? Necessarily such estimates are but approximate, and the only ob- ject here is to show that instead of an or careless exaggeration the made was well within the linn it of probability. In fact, the data col lected when the statement was made fairly indicated that the loss would be largely understated, and intentionally, in naming S6 GOO GOO OO0