The Pioche weekly record. [volume] (Pioche, Nev.) 1877-1900, 1896-07-02
CARLISLE REVIEWED.

A-~---N-
Gold and Silver.
In lengthy review of Secretary Car
isles speech to laboring men at Chi
cago the Memphis Commercial Appeal
refers to it as curious mass of eco
nomic fallacy, misapplied and pervert-
ed history, erratic deduction, eccentric
logic and bald, dogmatic propositions
in conflict with the most elementary
principles of economic science"
Let us take Mr.. Carlisle's initial
proposition, the foundation stone of
his whole argument, says the CONNER
cial Appeal. He says that the first
effect of the free coinage of silver
would be the expulsion from the coun-
try of all its gold, thereby diminishing
the volume of money by one-third.
The purchasing power of the remain
der, he says, would be reduced so per
cent; that Is. &C 1modittcs would com.
rnand twice IS much money as before,
and We should have an immense infa-
ton of prices caused by an immense
coutrsstion of the currencyi
There would be, says Mr. Carlisle,
only two-thirds the amount Of money
now in circulation, and 1t would be so
deprecated that it would require twice
rs much money to transact the busi-
ness of the country. Let US follow
Mr.. Carlisle's fantastic logic to the
end. The amount of money every in
dividual can obtain for the transaction
of his business will depend on the
prices he can get for what he has to
sell. Mr.. Carlisle's proposition is that
1,ry n~vaolIinrr II -
prices would be doubled; or, in other
words, every man in the country could
command twice as much money as be-
fore, though all combined would have
less!
Again, II 1t would require twice as
much money as the then existing vol
ume to transact the country's business
the demand for money would be 100
per cent greater than the supply Per-
sons familiar with the law of demand
and supply would be apt to say that
the value of the money would certain
ly increase under the tremendous lift
ing power OF such demand. Not so,
Mr. Carlisle. To him a contemporaries
GUS decrease of 33H per cent. in the
supply and increase of 100 per cent in
demand is perfectly consistent with a
fall of so per cent. in value! Must we
obliterate all the laws of supply and
demand when we come to reason about
money? Is it possible to make money
scarcer make the demand twice as
great, and at the same time make it
twice as easy to get money? Such is
tho case if Mr. Carlisle's proposition is
correct--if you can at the same time
cnu utSact the volume of money and in
crcaae prices; that is, the money-get-
tinr power of commodities.
Again: All the gold would leave the
country, SAYS Mr. Carlisle, because it
would no longer be in demand for
monetary purposes. All the monetary
demand of 10 GOO, 900 OF the most active
fnoney-seekers in the world, for pay
ing many hundred million dollars of
debt, for carrying on the vast industry,
trade and commerce of this great
country, would be withdrawn from
gold and concentrated on silver. Yet,
according to Mr.. Carlisle this stupen-
deus influence would not affect the
gulIe OF either metal by the fraction
of cent? And this is monetary
.eience as expounded by one of its
most famous savants Mr.. Carlisle
refers to the operation of the mint
laws of 1892 and 1884 establishing the
ratio of coinage in this country to
prove that legislation cannot affect
the value of money metals. If any
thing is demonstrated by the operation
of these laws it is that the value of
the metals was fixed and controlled by
coinage laws. The most learned and
the most candid gold monometallists
admit that the coinage ratio of the
French mints dominated the relative
values of gold and silver for three
quarters of a century. Throughout
the most extreme fluctuations in their
relative production the values OF gold
and silver kept substantially steady at
the French legal ratio of 15]1 to l.
When two countries open their mints
to the coinage of two metals at vary
ing ratios the result will be that the
country whose law places the higher
value on gold will get the gold
and the country packing the high
er value on silver will get the
silver. But both countries will
have the full benefit of both
in regulating the volume of their cur.
rency. This was what happened un,
der the laws referred to. If a gold or
a silver dollar went out of the country
1t put another and as good dollar in
it's place. That was substantial bi
metallism. Now, when gold dollar
goes out, as they have been steadily
going for several years, there is M
way to fill its place, except by mort
gaging the country to buy back tn,
gold. There is the difference between
monometallism and bimetallism. An
other difference Mr.. Carlisle ignored Il
that prior to the demonstration o
silver the debtor always had the op
ton to pay his debt in the cheape
money if one became cheaper than tn
other. Now he is compelled to pay Il
the dearer money.
Mr.. Carlisle undertook to show tha
the wage-earners would suffer becaus
the rise in prices would not be accom-
panied by corresponding rise i
wages-in other words, that stock
and stones would command increase
prices, but that human energy, inte
ligence and will could not keep th
pace. His illustration to prove thi
was taken from the period when wa
was fragrant. Mr.. Carlisle thinks tina
a time of war when business wa
demoralised, markets destroyed, con
merce preyed upon by armed ships, a
forded an extremely favorable tes
But there Is another considerable
which he will find discussed at lengt
in some of his old speeches and in eau
paign text.books-the oppressive cor
tract labor laws. 1t was during thi
very time that laws were enforce
which enabled employees to bring 70
eigners into the country under col