New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1896-08-20
SENiTOP SIDEWAYS "ERRORS.'

Mr. Bryan's chief newspaper supporter in this
city prints, under the caption Some Errors OF
Sherman" some not altogether temperate re-
marks about the "unscrupulous and inaccurate
character of the Ohio Senator's recent speech in
favor of honest money. The Journal accuses
him of uttering exploded falsehoods" when he
stated that the decline in the value of silver was
caused by the excessive quantity of silver pro-
duced relatively to the output Of gold since 1913,
and declares that it has repeatedly published
statistics showing that the number of ounces
"of silver produced between 1913 and 1896,
throughout the world is exactly sixteen and
"one-half to every ounce of gold produced in the
same period
We do not blame our contemporary for being
worried over Senator Sherman's exposure Of the
fallacy of the free-sver argument. but we con
fess curiosity as to where it gets its own stalls
tics" The Director of the United States Mint
is recognized throughout the world as the best
authority on the subject of gold and silver pro
duction His last official report, covering the
fiscal year ended June 30. 1890. contains a table
which gives the production of gold and silver
in the world since the discovery of America.
From that table find that from 1874 to 1894,
inclusive. the worlds production of gold was
12O,946,711 ounces. and the worlds production
of silver during the same period was 2.149. 256,-
203 ounces A simple process in division will
show any one familiar with the rules of ordinary
arithmetic that the ratio of production for the
period must therefore have been 11.7I ounces Of
silver TO | ounce Of gold, instead of exactly
1914 ounces Of silver to | ounce of gold. or
course there may be a system of POpocratic
arithmetic, as there is a system of POpocratic
logic peculiar to the PopOcratic mind but If
there is, we do not understand IT, So much for
the alleged statistics"
The inference drawn from the statement al
ready quoted is as follows: THE rate of pro-
'ducton for the whole tweniy-three years, taken
together has been more exactly that required
''to maintain the ratio of l6 TO than 1t ever was
before in the worlds history Even if orr
contemporaries "satistics'' were accurate. it
would seem that altogether too much had been
proved by them History shows that "produc-
ton ratio and market ratio are anything but
synonymous terms In 1853. twenty years be-
fore the terrible "crine Of 1873" the market
ratio between silver and gold was 1888 to |. and
the production ratio was 4.16 to |. In 1860 the
market ratio was 1920 to !. and the production
ratio 5.46 TO l. In 1870 the market ratio was
1917 to 1, and the production ratio 800 to J..
In 1880 the market ratio was 1900 to |. and the
production ratio 453 to I. In 1894 the market
ratio was 30. 80 TO 1. and the production ratio
1920 to |.
If these figures do not show that the relative
production Of silver as compared with gold has
increased and that the commercial ratio has
merely kept pace with the production ratio. we
confess ourselves at n loss TO know what they
do show. They further show that the market
ratio and the commercial ratio have never been
the same. IT would seem to be logical infer
ence from the records Of the two metals that If a
production ratio Of 416 to | resulted in a market
ratio of 15.33 to l, and production ratio of 903
to resulted in market ratio of l5.5I to /
all before the "crime of 1878 production
ratio of 17.77 to 1-even after that "crime'
would naturally result in market ratio very
close to the present market ratio. Certainly it
was not the "crme of 1873 which affected the
market ratio previous TO the date Of its passage.
II II was not the relative amount of gold and
silver production. what was il?