Rocky Ford enterprise., 1895-08-01
10.O595O
7.73637
6.11249
6.59393
7.l4O76
7.56480
7.14641
Totals. 80, 1888 1921, ,47o, ,ss7
S7.3393S


Totals. ss, ,713,s1s 1921 1,47o,ss7 s7.33sss
These are average prices which are
genuine and reliable. They are so near
to absolute correctness that on multi
plying the grand total Of 80. .713 ,31S bar
rels by $7.3393s. the general average
price, the product will be found to be
only $143.76 in excess of the fact. and a
trivial error. which might be greatly
reduced. or altogether avoided. by suf-
fciently extending the decimal places
representing the fraction Of a cent In
the price.
How different, however, will be the
result Of computing average price by
the method which violates arithmetical
rule. In that case the sum of the an
nual average prices is 800. which,
on being divided by 10. the number OF
different prices, yields an average OF
$77212123 per barrel, or $0.3S18323 In
excess Of the real average. This error,
applied to the grand total of 39,713,31S
barrels. amounts to 1888, ,972.41. being
a departure of trifie over per cent
from the fact. And II an error to that
extent can be committed in falsely COM
muting the average price of a single
commodity, who can truthfully say that
like error will not be committed many
scores of times in computing the aver
age prices of several hundred commo-
dities? When, therefore, 1t is asserted
about the general average price per
year of 232 different articles, measured
in their rise or fall fr price by an index
number, that the decline between the
year 1860 and 1892 was only about
per cent, What reliance can be safely
placed on the conclusion, and what pos
sible worth is 1t as evidence that the
silverites are wrong in their conten-
tion?
The long array of prices sup
porting the conclusion bears on
its own face testimony to Its
own unreliability. Where Is to
be found the record of quantities
sold and of values obtained therefore,
covering several hundred commodities
throughout more than thirty years. and
furnishing such a divisor and such
dividend as would comply with arith-
metical rule in ascertaining average
prices? Who can point out such a rec
ord? Nobody, for the record does not
exist and never has existed in shape
to be available for the purpose named.
Only one resort has been open to use
the spurious and worthless method Of
adding prices together and dividing by
their number.
1t Is no defense of such prices to say
that they are published under the au-
thority of the United States. and are
embodied in a report made by the
finance committee of the United States
senate. Arithmetical rule is not to be
nullifled by the pressure Of mere au-
thority, no matter how high and power
full. The government, in preparing sta
tistics for public information and use,
is as much bound to obey the rules of
arithmetic as any private individual.
When government refuses such obed-
ience, its departure from mathematical
accuracy has no more binding force,
and deserves no more respect, than the
same blunder committed by one of Its
most ignorant citizens. Whoever en-
ploys these bastard prices in argument,
giving them the position and signifi-
canoe of general prices, serves under
the banner of error and contributes to
the exaltation of sophistry.
A still greater ENHANCEMENT in error
takes place when, to strengthen the
case against the friends of bimetallism,
the false average prices are reduced to
equivalent gold value; for such reduc-
tion must be preceded by the ascertain
ment of the average price of gold-an
unattainable end. Not even for one
day, much less for week, a month
or a year, can the average price Of gold
be obtained, simply because no record
was kept of the data essential to the
purpose from Jan. 10, 1862, until the
close of December, 1s7s-the period of
almost seventeen years during which
gold was at premium. 1t would be
necessary to have the total quantities
of gold sold within any chosen term
and the whole sum paid for these guam
titles before the divisor and the divi-
dend would be supplied, as demanded
by the arithmetical rule. In the absence
of these indispensable data, the only
substitute is the false method of adding
together the different prices of gold and
dividing by their number. That addi-
tional violation of arithmetical rule
augments and complicates the blunder.
An argument built up on such an un-
sound foundation is like tree rotten
at the roots, which must be rotten in
its branches.
1t is full time to call halt in the use
Of these doctored statistics of prices.
The evil grows constantly. 1t shows
itself on every hand. AS long ago as
1863 the finance report of the United
States for that fiscal year set forth the
highest and lowest prices of a COM
siderable list of staple articles, followed
by the average price obtained by the
spurious method. This list embraced
the period 1S25-1S63. have an annual
report of the New York produce ex-
change, in which every average price
is of the bastard sort. The late Prof.
Elliott of the treasury department pre-
pared the false average prices of gold,
which were used by that bureau OF
statistics to reduce the currency values
of imported merchandise to equivalent
gold value, as published in tabulations
by the bureau-a mode of statement
which has led many honest minds to
erroneous conclusions. Now we have
the voluminous report of the finance
committee of the United States senate
| r. he tn1a f0v 80 III