Washington standard. [volume] (Olympia, Wash. Territory) 1860-1921, 1895-12-27
WHY THE RATIO
IS 16 TO I.
LEARNED REASONS GIVEN FOR
THE COINAGE RATIO.

For Every Pound of Gold Produced
Sixteen Pounds of silver are also
| Produced-Why Ii Isn't 8 To l.
The Most Honest Money on Earth.
The opponent Of bimetallism is sell
dom 50 well pleased as when attack.
ing the ratio OF 16 to l. Men who
never in their lives bestowed an hour
OF intelligent and consecutive thought
upon the subject will assume look of
superior wisdom and ask why that
particular ratio, rather than some
other? Why not an 8 to or l to l!
Very sagely they remark that if the
United States can open its mints to
both metals and make sixteen ounces
OF silver equal to one ounce of gold in
the coinage. there is no good reason
why one ounce of silver cannot be
made equal to one ounce of gold.
Having thus learnedly disposed
of the 1G to l proposition, they pro-
ceed to say that if silver is to be
coined at all it should be at the
" market price," which represents a
ratio Of something like 80 to l.
In former issue comment was
made upon Judge Aldredge's ridicul-
GUS claim that the farmer is now bet
ter off with so cent wheat than he
formally was with his wheat at . dol
lar. We ventured to suggest that if a
drop to so cents had improved the
farmers condition, drop to 25 cents
would improve it still more.
A correspondent writing to the Ma
tional Bimetallist attemps to apply
the same line of criticism to the
question OF ratio. He asks, if 16 to l
is good thing, why would not 10 to
one be better? In this way he seeks
to show the iallacy of the ratio of 16
to l.
The weakness of such reasoning lies
in the assumption OF an analogy
where none exists.
1t is as clear as light that the
farmer has not been benefited by a
fall of 80 per cent. in the price of his
wheat, but it does not follow that be.
cause it would be good thing to coin
silver at $l.29 per ounce, it would be
still better to coin it at 50 or So or
$40 or $40.
Our correspondents conclusion
would be sound if the bimetallic idea
were merely to increase the volume or
money indefinitely and without limit.
In that case to would be 16 times
as good as 16 to l. The use of whole
mountains OF paper would be better
still.
But the bimetallist seeks to do
nothing of the kind. His purpose is
merely to restore the monetary sys-
tenn that was subverted in 1873, and
utilize the two metals in the best and
most equitable way.
In fixing ratio between them for
money use all the elements which
would naturally affect the value OF
each for that purpose should be taken
into consideration.
This is exactly what the bimetallist
does in advocating the ratio of 16 to /.
He is not leaping blindly in the dark
and demanding a purely arbitrary ra-
ito, wholly regardless OF existing con-
ditions.
There are three excellent reasons
why bimetallists in this country have
generally fixed upon the ratio of 16 to
l. First because that was the legal
ratio existing from 1884 until the de-
monetizing act of 1873. There was
nothing wrong with that ratio in it.
self, but as France and the other
States OF the Latin Union coined at
15t silver was given a valuation in
Europe about 3 per cent. higher than
we gave it. Hence but little was
coined at our mint. But the mints OF
the Latin Union being now closed to
silver, there would be no conflict OF
ratios, and it is believed that our
mint rate would control the relative
value of gold and silver everywhere.
Second-Many bimetallists believe
that Is! would be the more logical
ratio, because the full legal tender sill
yer of Europe is generally coined at
that rate. But monometallists have
professed to fear that if our mint
we're opened. European countries
would at once seize the opportunity
and get rid Of their silver coin by ex-
changing it for American gold.
The fear rests upon no substantial
basis, because European governments
are not anxious to get rid of their
silver. Even Germany, who took the
lead in demonetizing it, now perceives
the folly OF the act. She has sold no
silver for about Is years, and in fact
has no more than she needs for the
smaller transactions of her people.
The other countries OF Europe which
hold the principal stocks of silver
have shown no desire to part with it
and could gain nothing by doing so.
On the contrary they would lose, be.
cause of she expense which such a
change would involve.
II