The Saint Paul globe. (St. Paul, Minn.) 1896-1905, 1896-08-20
PROF. LAUGHLIN,s SECOND LET.
TER ON THE MONEY CUES
TION.
INCREASE OF GOLD OR SILVER
DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN AN
INCREASE OF NATIONAL
PROSPERITY,
MONEY MERELY A MACHINE
We Need Most a Steady Condition Of
Business to- Keep Production
Growing.
Copyrighted by the Author.)

Copyrighted by the Author.)
The proposition to change the exist
ing gold standard for one Of silver
(Which would be the result Of free
coinage of silver at 16 to y would
Ering about an upheaval in the com
mercial world equal to that produced
in the physical world by an earth
quake, which changed the level Of the
sea coast relatively to that Of the
water. And when some persons sug-
gest that free coinage be tried as an
experiment, and that if it's advocates
prove to be mistaken, it could be given
up, it is exactly as if the Japanese
should have tried the experiment of
an earthquake and tidal wave on For
mosa, thinking to give it up in case it
did not work well. But, meanwhile,
the change of level had submerged
millions Of property and robbed 10000
people of life. So would it be with free
coinage of silver The experiment OF
getting from one level TO another is a
destructive thing; after the damage
has been done you cannot get back
where you were before
But by some the change of standard
is favored on the ground that more
money" will bring prosperity. Unless
1t is wished to change the standard
with the effects described above, then
the only possible reasons that can be
urged for more money" are: IL
That We need more money as the
standard with which goods are com
pared, and in terms of which their
values are expressed; or 90 that we
onrn
exchange" by means of which goods
are exchanged against each other CT
here omit the question of indebtedness,
which demands separate treatment)
To suppose that the standard should
be increased in number because the
things to be compared with it may
have increased. is fallacious on the
face of it. In order to ensure a salts
factory standard of weight. a single
Troy pound deposited in the Tower of
London is sufficient to set the stand
ard for other weights all over the
world Two of these would be no
better than one. For the essential
idea is to have at least one of unchang-
ing weight. Stability Of weight is not
acquired by having many weights but
by being exact with one particular
weight. Other weights made exactly
after this standard can be multiplied
according to the needs of weighing.
one pound weight and one pair Of
scales will last through a thousand
weighing operations; so it is absurd to
suppose that a pound weight is need
ed for every pound of goods to be
weighed, or in any such proportion.
Then scales are invented which save
the actual use of weights. So it is, in
general, with money, when regarded
as standard of value; in comparing
goods with money one does not need
to actually use the money. From sell
ing one dozen Of eggs. the farmer
knows the value Of the other eggs In
the market that day.
But surely, it will be said, in selling
and buying goods, the more money
the greater prosperity. Let me point
out, however, that exchanging things
does not increase their number, nor
does increasing one kind Of thing
thereby increase things of another
kind. Increasing the number of hats
does not mean an inoreaSe Of bricks
So, increasing one kind Of commodity
like gold or silver, does not increase
the wheat or corn which is 10 be ex-
changed In fact, the essential thing
to every man is the quantity of prop
erty he owns, not the amount Of
money he is, at any moment, using.
We are constantly confusing the sup
ply Of things we need for daily use
with the mere instrument by which
those necessary articles are trans,
ferred to us in return for work or for
some of our own property My days
labor is paid for in money, but 1 i'm
mediately exchange the money for
provisions. In reality, l exchanged
my services for provisions, using money
only as a go-between. Indeed, the
money played the least important
part in the operation; the main things
are the labor and quantity of provis-
ions l got for it. To suppose that in
creasing the money increases proyis-
ions is as absurd as to suppose that
increasing the dinner pals will in
crease the number of good dinners
When a teamster gets a chalk
for every load of earth he dumps, put
ting down more chalk-marks doesn't
increase the earth pile; indeed, to in
crease the counters without bringing
more loads of earth is an attempt to
get credit for something he has not
done-and we generally call that lying
and cheating.
A very simple fact will make the
whole matter perfectly clear Since 1875
more gold and silver has been produced
than in any like period in the history
of the world-s2, 539, 00O, 900 of gold and
81, 209. 100000 of silver, or $4,748, 000, 900
together. 1t is an unparalleled pro-
duction of the precious metals which
are used as money. If more gold and
silver brings prosperity, why are we
not growing in riches and prosperity?
An increase of gold or silver however
great, means nothing whatever as re-
CARDS the quantity Of bread, meat and
clothing necessary to the well-being
of the greatest number of men. OF
course, those who own this increase of
gold and silver are richer; but, also,
man who owns an increased quantity
of cattle would be richer.
And here are other facts which put
the same case in a still stronger light
In 1873 the total money of the United
States in circulation, according to Off
cial reports, was $751;, S81 ,809; in 1895 1t
was s., 601, 1858, 1853. That Is, the money
was more than doubled-and yet we
are complaining Of hard times. While
population, since 1873, gained Il per
cent, money gained 113 per cent, and
yet times are hard. Does that not show
that the amount of the circulation and
the amount Of employment for labor
have little to do with each other? In
creasing the money does not increase
fnr ffra Gorrna onGnr1 that