Graham guardian., 1895-12-13
STABILITY OF VALUES.
Tho sophistry of Gold Standard writer
CompletelY Overturned.

press with document from the pen or
Mr. Frank L. McVey, entitled "Qual-
ity of Money and Wages" Mr.. Nc
Vey discusses the quality of money and
says, among other things, ''for obvious
reasons stability of value is an essen
tial quality of medium which is to be
permanently used. Indeed, it is con-
ceivable that more bulky material,
such as iron, might for currency pur-
poses be on the whole better than gold,
provided that the value of iron at diff
ferent times and places was more
stable than that of gold. In fact, how
ever, the very bulk of iron when COM
pared with gold of the same value
tends to make iron less uniform in
value than gold A metal so bulky
that given value of it can with diff
Guilty be transported from place to
place, and the local value of which
is therefore so largely dependent
on local demands is naturally
less stable in value than one of
which the same value can be easily
| transpoI ted that the relations between
the local demand for it and supply of
it are practically fixed by the relations
between demand and supply in whole
country, and almost at once in the
whole world. Taking the world over,
therefore, for this reason alone land
there are others), gold is more stable
in value than iron, just as iron is more
stable in value than potatoes; and both
on account of the great bulk of given
value and the great variations in their
value at different times and places
Potatoes would be less acceptable than
either iron or silver or gold as stand
ard of value or as medium of ex-
change"
Mr.. McVey is sound in his premises
but wrong in his conclusions. Every
one of us agrees that the more stable
and unchanged a money is in value,
the more satisfactory it will be to do
business with. 1t is customary to say
that gold is of a stable value, while
the other commodities fuctuate, but
as matter of fact gold fiuctuates
more than any other commodity.
The productions of the farm
and factories decrease in value,
compared with gold, because gold
increases in value com pared with them.
1t is nonsense to talk of the intrinsic
value of gold. Probably none of the
more common metals has less intrinsic
value than gold. The intrinsic value
of anything is it's value to sustain life,
to help man clothe himself, or to fur
nish him with more of the necessities or
pleasures of existence. Gold, aside
from its position as money, does none
of these things If either gold or iron
were to be banished from the earth,
mankind would not hesitate to retain
iron and allow gold to depart. Lead,
copper, zinc, in fact all the baser met
ais, have intrinsically more value than
gold. Silver has a greater intrinsic
value. 1t is harder and more durable,
and can be used in the manufacture of
knives, forks, and other useful articles
much more easily than gold. The in
trinsic value argument therefore falls
to the ground and gold becomes valua-
BILE simply from monetary standpoint.
The question then remains, has gold
fluctuated in value, or is it the COM
modities that have fluctuated? If the
same amount of flour, of potatoes, or
other farm products are needed to sus-
tain life to-day, as formerly, then the
intrinsic value of four, of potatoes,
etc., has remained stationary. The
same thing is true of the commodities
used in the manufacture of the articles
used in our business, or our home life
intrinsically their valbe increases only
when they become capa BILE of doing us
greater service. If this proposition is
correct, il follows that it is not com.
modities, but money, that has fluctu-
ated in value. That kind of money,
therefore, which retains it's value to
other commodities the most closely is
the most stable kind of currency. II
the production of silver has kept pace
with he increased productions of the
stabilities and luxuries of life, then we
will find the value of silver and the
value of other products more nearly or
par.
AS matter OF fact, this is exactly
what has occurred. Silver, wheat
farm products and clothing have riser
and fallen in value together. o.
course, sometimes particular circum
stances have tended to increase the
value temporarily of this or that article
} of commerce, but taking the average
for term of years, the value Of silver
impaired with that of other commodi
} ties has remained very much more
, stationary than the value of gold. Il
follows, therefore, that if Mr.. McVey'.
premises are correct, and we believe
they are, silver possesses in far great
er degree than gold that very essential
characteristic of the best money
sta bility of value.
Mr.. McVey attempts to prove tina
even if wages are lower on gold basis
than they would be on silver basis
nevertheless the laborer loses nothing
+ because he can buy more with his golt
than he could if he were paid in silver
The fallacy of this idea, however, be
comes self-evident when it is seen thai
, in gold countries the wage-earner re
ceives relatively less money, measured
r by what he can buy, than he does il
, silver countries. 1t is a notable fac
That while in the United States the
!. consumption of wheat per capita ha;
, fallen nearly two bushels per annum
it has risen in Mexico and other silver
countries. 1t is also worthy of note
that while the manufacturers in Mex
leo are rapidly increasing, and the
condition of the people is improving
daily, that the exact opposite of this ha!
I taken place in this country. While good.
are certainly cheaper in the United
States than ever before, their consump
ton has fallen off, and the demand