The herald., 1896-10-25
bushel of wheat cost Is cents of our

puSueI OF Wneat COST 10 cents OF OUT
money.
1.-The advance Of civili,a ION was ac-
companied by an increased production
Of gold and silver.".
Note that the measure Of value was
the white metal.
Three centuries later, owing to in
creased supply in both metals (not one),
three bushels Of wheat could be bought
for one ounce of silver"
So, for three long centuries the silver
held its own as gauge. Does this go to
prove that gold must be the unit of value?
THE stock of coin in Christendom al
the end Of the year 1866 was S., 1852, ,000, ,000."
Now, let me quote rather conflicting
statement than that heard daily from
the wise men of our east:
1T Is impossible to ascertain now
tween the market values of gold and sill
yer. 1t may be said that they are al
most equally suitable for the purposes
Of money. Gold has a higher specific
gravity, and Is susceptible of a higher
polish, but the difference in these re-
spects is not great enough to cause a
difference of so per cent in values be-
tween them. There is reason to doubt
whether the relative values were ever
proportioned to the relative supplies
/ ask my readers to reflect OH this
carefully.
I'VE have no precise information
about supplies before the beginning Of
the 18th century At that time an ounce
Of gold was worth 11.4 ounces Of silver.
In the course Of time centuries previous
to 1900 the stock Of precious metal in
Christendom had increased $780, 900
OF which two thirds in value and SO per
cent In weight was silver so that If the
value Of the two metals had been pro-
portionate to the supply, one ounce of
gold ought to have been worth thirty of
silver in 1900 Notwithstanding the in
creased production of silver in the 18th
century, the relative value of the two
metals was precisely the same in 1916
as in 1717. and Notwithstanding the vast
ly greater relative production of gold
since 1S49, the relative values have
scarcely changed. We observe, too, that
although gold is very scarce in India and
Asia it does not bear so high price as
in Europe"
Consequently, my gold friends will
concede there is quite a difference Of
opinion regarding this law of supply.
ut was expected about 1853 when the
permanence of the California and Aus
tralian gold mines was no longer mat
ter Of doubt that the relative value Of
gold would soon fall as much as it had
risen in the 10th century, but this ex-
pectation has not been realized.
"The coinage of all nations fixes the
comparative prices in such manner
that no change can occur without over
coming the obstacles which did not exist
200 years ago. Throughout Christendom
the governments and the merchants say
that an ounce Of gold shall be worth If
teen of silver and to prevent any ques-
ton about the precise relation coins Of
both metals are in universal use with
conventional value" that is, arising by
agreement, custom or usage. The value
Is conventional to great degree, we
know that it does not bear any precise
proportion to the supply. If the value is
now conventional why should not the
conventionality stand? A change in
snch a matter necessarily implies loss
and inconvenience"
Yet, my Republican friends, silver was
demonetized in 1873, in the face ofsuch
historical facts accessible to any think
ing American citizen. In conclusion let
me kindly yet impressively add: Can
we afford in future to ignore such au-
thority as this in favor Of a partisan
view Of this. the greatest issue before
the American people? Emphatically
as a staunch silver Republican can say
that do not believe we can, If we have
any mind of our own left.
S. ARION LEWIS.
October 8, 1896.