The Topeka state journal. [volume] (Topeka, Kansas) 1892-1980, 1895-07-27

OA44CdSOs July co. lie hui Wy
silver debate was continued to-day be-
fore a representative audience, includ-
ing merchants, bankers and wage
earners, not only of Chicago, but from
throughout the country as well. To-
days discussion was continued on the
question of ratios between gold and
silver. In the following report the
most essential parts of the controversy
are fully covered:
Mr.. Harvey Summarizes.
Mr.. Harvey-The debate at the last
session is of value in this:
L That during the 80 or 40 years
prior to 1873 silver was seeking the
minis to be coined into silver dollars,
and that any contrary statement is
not true; that the 100000 and
more that thus were coined at the
minis in the two years Immediately
preceding characterization were for cir
culation in Nevada and California,
where they had refused to use the paper
money in their circulation, and were
using gold and silver
2. That by the table copied from
the official reports from Washington,
for about 200 years prior to 1873 the
commercial ratio between gold and sill
yer was at the legal ratio of 1872 to
fixed by France during the period that
ratio existed, and with the legal ratio
that was fixed prior to that, and that
there was no difference between the le-
gal ratio and the commercial ratio in
that 200 years except the cost of eX-
change, and that for the % years since
1873 the legal ratio and the CONNER ia1
ratio, as we claim, by reason of de-
monetization, have separated rapidly
and gone from practically 1914 to 1 to
80 to L.
8. That by the table represented in
Kilograms taken from the same official
reports from Washington, the quantity
ratio in the world in the 32S years prior
to 1873 between silver and gold ranged
from Sc of silver to of gold to of sill
yer to 1 of gold, and that during all
that time and during those fluctuations
the commercial ratio hung tenaciously
to the legal ratio, the quantity ratio
seemingly in no way affecting the legal
ratio or commercial ratio.
4. That by the table of prices of silver
as measured in gold in London from
1888 to 1894 We see that the price of sill
yer there. as measured in gold, up to
1873 was practically steady, cost of ex-
change being sufficient to account for
the slight fiuctuation. But that since
1873 silver in the London market, as
measured in gold, has rapidly declined
from so pence per ounce to 28B pence
per ounce
5. That this violent huctuation and
depression of silver has only come
since 1873.
Why the London market of silver in
gold is taken in quoting the price of
silver is this: England went to the
gold standard in 1916, and since then
London has become the market of the
world In 1874 the Peel act of England
required the Bank of England to pay a
certain stipulated price for every ounce
of gold; there free coinage to gold was
fixed in that way, so that growing out
of their gold standard and the Peel
act of 1874, exchanges being drawn on
London from all portions of the world
gradually a custom grew up of meaning
gold when you spoke of exchange, until
it finally became a habit among our
bankers in the United States to say
things are worth so much in gold. It
was the dominating influence of Lon
don and England on the financial world
that caused the custom to arise OF
speaking of gold prices.
Alleged Errors in "COin.''
Mr.. Horr-Gentlemen On yesterday
Mr.. Harvey stated that had found but
one error in the statements in his book
and he defied me to call attention to any
other mistake that he had made. The
mistakes that are made in Mr.. Harvey's
book are, many of them, not mistakes
as to the words he uses, but misleading
differences from positions which he
takes. and which he, giving him credi
for the ordinary sense of an ordinary
man, must have known when he printed
and published such statements. I viii
now, in my opening remarks, call some
attention to what 1 mean. In YOU
book, Mr. Harvey, you say:
ut is estimated by all men of judg
ment who have given practical atten
ton to mining, that the silver now il
existence has cost not less than 81 pc
ounce, and many put it much higher"
You will find that in Coins" book
page "A. I deny that men of judgmen
and experience claim any such thing
1 assert that every man of any common
sense, who has studied this question
knows instantly that that statement i
not true; knows instantly that silve
has not cost that much for production
because silver has been constantly in
creasing in production at low price
running from $1.20 an ounce down t
81 cents an ounce. According to thi
statement the silver-mine owners an
men engaged in producing silver los
III the year 1892 $34, 900, 900. They in
creased their product in 1898 so tina
they would have lost that year SIS, 900
OO0 Again, in '94, the increase was S
large that they lost $109, 600, 900, tots
loss in three years of S262 600 O0n Nov