The Monticellonian., 1895-09-20
HE FALL OF PRICES
Nuts for the Gold Standard Advocates ss
 Crack.

l
 Nuts for the Gold standard Advocates Sc Crack.
 The people who deny the apprecia' tion of gold, and insist that the fall of i prices is due to improvements in pro- ductien, transportation, new territory, etc, are given a very tough nut to crack by the movement of prices last year and this year. Last year there was a heavy drop in average prices, not only in this country, but through out the world. Many persons explain 1 all such movements by local causes, but the similarity of the record abroad makes such explanations absurdities in this case. English prices were not affected by tariff legislation, or fear of an exhausted gold reserve, or any other 1 known cause except the worlds money | system. The English price record now universally accepted as authoritative l is that of Mr. Sauerbeck, which is l based on the movement in prices of 1 forty-fve leading articles of commerce, | the average prices of the several arti. eles from 1867 to 1877 being assumed as the standard. The average price level of these articles fell from 6s in 1893 to s3 in 1891. In other words, the aver. age prices of these articles were 7l$ per cent. lower in 1894 than in 1893, g per cent. lower than the average of the preceding ten years. 20 per cent. lower than the ten years 1ss7-s7, and 37 per cent lower than the eleven years 1S67-77.
 This is remarkable record, and one of it's peeuiarities of the last year of the movement was that 1t affected all the commodities considered. Says Mir. Sauerbeek: "fhe decline during the past year extended to all commodities, and in no case was it less than per cent" Sixteen of the articles fell to the lowest point recorded in the pres ent century, and among these were such staples as wheat, flour, rice, su- gar, lead, cotton, jute, merino wool, silk and soda. Will some of the adyo- cates of the theory of fall of prices from natural causes point out the nat ural causes that had so marked an effect in 1894? What did it? Was it improved machinery, new processes, better transportation, or some other cause? Where was the new territory brought into the worlds use in 1894? What was the new machinery, pro- oesses, or other alleged eheapen- ing agency that reduced the price of every one of Mr. Sauerbeek' S forty-fye commodities at least per cent? What was the cause that af- fected alike the sheep and the silk worm, that made the production of both lead and soda less costly, that cheapened rice and jute? The bi- metallist points to the cause without hesitancy. It was a period of general depression. There were unusual de- mands on standard money. Gold, in which all these articles are measured, appreciated in value on account of the increased demand. That is an expla- nation that covers the ground, but where is any other explanation that covers it? They did not fall as meas ured in silver On the contrary, silver fell more than the average of these forty-fve articles, going from an aver age of SIS per ounce in 1893 to 5 635 per ounce in 1894 What were the nat ural causes that explain the move meut?
 This years movement thus far fur nishes the argument from the other side Most of these prices have ad- vaneed Silver is now up to S.67 What natural causes account for it2 Has machinery suddenly deteriorated? Have the new processes been lost? Has the cost of transportation increased9 Has any territory been closed to the world? Have any silver mines disap- peared? Has the expense of mining silver increased2 How do you explain it? The bimetallist has no difficulty in assigning d cause. The depression is passing off The abnormal demand for standard money is decreasing Gold is depreciating on account of lessened demand. We should like to see some of our gold monometatlist contemporaries wrestle with this prob- lem. As scientific question, from a monometallist standpoint, it presents more difficult points for explanation than the ball-nozzle hose e-Indianapo- lis Sentinel.