The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1895-09-10


appointed in 1887 to investigate this
question, and the proceedings of the
Brussels conference in 1892. If you can
read and study those works carefully,
and still entertain the opinion that
your present side is the only side
Of this controversy, my sole comment
must be that you have mistaken your
place of abode and also your calling.
If you can find in any of those pro-
ceedings a single argument against sill
yer that should address itself to the
intelligence of a patriotic American 1
viii be under everlasting obligations
to you for mention of 1t.
Even brief glance at them
will show you that England is
the only serious obstacle in the way
of an international agreement for the
restoration of silver, and that same
glance will disclose her reason for it.
The decentralization of silver increased
the demand for gold, enhanced its
value, and thus gave her an enormous
advantage as the great creditor nation
of the world. To remonetize silver
would bring gold down to its normal
level and deprive her of that advant-
age.
If you do not understand this, I as
sure you that the English money lend
er does. So does Mr.. Gladstone.
Not Thoroughly Understood.
Your expression of the belief that the
arguments in favor of the free coinage
of silver are thoroughly well under
stood" by all of your readers is, to say
the least, a rather broad statement. 1t
must either have been a verbal slip, or
you must have an unusually we'll in
formed class of readers. If the former
be the case, the matter may be dis
missed from further consideration. If
the latter, I feel some curiosity to
know where they acquired their infor-
nation. They surely never got it from
the columns of the Independent, for if
your editorial upon Senator Morrill, is
to be taken as a fair sample it shows
literally no conception of the funda-
mental principles involved. This can
be demonstrated by a reference to a
single proposition. In that editorial
you scout the idea of free coinage
raising the value of silver and prove
% It's absurdity by alleging that the
sherman law" lowered the price. In
stead of silver rising under the opera
tion of that law you say Everybody
knows that the opposite effect fol-
lowed, which is equivalent to saying
that it lowered the price.
Not only do you seek to prove one
tnlng by citing another which is es-
sentlally different, but you have actu-
! ally inverted the principle of political
economy known as the law of supply
and demand That the opening of the
American mint to silver would create
a demand for it which does not exist
is fact of which you seem to be in a
state of bfissful ignorance. Why,
even as dosmatic and unyielding an
| opponent OF silver restoration as Mr.
Atkinson, when before the coinage
committee, in 1891, was compelled to
admit that the closing of the Latin
! Union mints to silver lowered it's value
by shutting off the demand. Then why
would not the opening of the American
mint nave the opposite effect and raise
Its value, by creating a demand?
How do you account for the circum-
stance that when the East Indian
mint was closed in 1893 silver dropped
nineteen cents an ounce in three DAYS
Do you not think that the reopening of
that mint would raise the price of sill
yer some? Do you honestly think that
phe demand created by the "Sher-
man law" lowered the value of silver?
DO you not know that under the opera
ton of that law silver did, in fact. rise
to about $1.20? If you are really sin
cere in this belief. beg of you to con
suit the tables of the mint bureau.
from which you will learn that for the
year 1890 (he year of it's enactment)
the average price of silver was 1.O4
ereven cents an ounce higher than in
| 1889. -
sherman Law Unsatisfactory.
Furthermore, you certainly must
know that the Sherman law was in
no sense the equivalent of free coin
age, and that it rested upon en-
tirely different principles. 1t provided
merely for the purchase of a limited
quantity of silver. When it appeared
that these purchases were insufficient
no absorb the surplus lthe price began
to fall again. Just as long as there is
a surplus on the market the bullion
! price must be less than the coin value.
Ifhls is so simple proposition that
anybody ought to comprehend it. Still,
you argue in effect that silver without
a. demand for it, or with a very I'M
certain or fuctuating demand, is of
the same value as silver with a prac-
tically unlimited demand, and in fam
ing headlines you talk about the
logical inveracity of the silver cham
pions," while in your letter to me you
assert the belief that your readers are
thoroughly well informed" This
forces me ITO one of two conclusions
I First, you are scarcely competent to
pass Judgment upon the extent of your
readers information or, second, your
own logical veraoity is open to some
question.
1t also seems. strange that you should
have deemed it necessary to place
seven columns of your paper at the
disposal of the venerable senator to
enable him to "refute" the arguments
or free coinage men. experimenting ii
with more than a column of labored
editorial matter. if your readers were
already so thoroughly well informed -
In the concluding paragraph of that
editorial you urge your readers tC
study Senator MorrilPs article, nay
to read 1t twice. or even thrice, that
its statements and arguments may be
thoroughly learned and understood
Does that sound as If you thoughi
they already thoroughly well under
stood" it? Do you think that any
person can thoroughly well understand
a disputed question by simply studying
one side of it? Do you think it is In
strict conformity with the golden rule
to allow Senator Morrill, to state the
silver side in his own way and theT
demolish it in his own way, giving the
silver advocates no chance to reply
or even to state for the benefit of YOU
readers what their position actually is
/, of course, recognize your right tt
control your own columns. At the
same time cannot but regret the mar
rowness which has led you to deny tt
your readers q fair statement of thu
free coinage side. Considering the sup
posed impartial character of EouI
paper you should not have presented
one side unless you were willing Il