Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1896-08-12
Bimetallism and the Double Standard.

Disseminated. Their misuse leads to
much confusion of thought. The en-
ployment of the two metals, gold ard
silver, at a fixed relative value, as
parts of monetary system, constl-
tutes bimetallism, but does not cOnsti-
stute a double standard. The United
States, England Germany, France
all the great commercial nations Of
the world are bimetallic nations, but
not one of them has the double stand
ard. All these ma ions use, and will
continue to use to a greater or less
extent, gold and silver as the mater
ial out of which to make coins, and
that is the essential element in BIZ
metallism. But, while this is true, it
is also true that all these nations have
a single standard, gold, and silver is
not standard money. There is much
talk in this country about the demon
etization of silver, but silver has not
been demonetized. This talk and the
use of this term are very misleading.
The truth is that silver has ceased to
be standard money, but it still consti-
tutes as large a portion as ever OF our
circulating medium. We have $780,
| 900, 900 of silver nonetized, not denlO1oe-
tied, in this country to-day, and 1t
passes current all over our broad
land, and even in foreign countries,
at a nominal value double that Of
its intrinsic worth as a commodity in
! tne markets of the world. Does that
| look as if we have demonetized it?
| Has anyone even proposed to abolish
| the use of silver as money? Does
| anybody hesitate to tender it or to re-
ceive it in the transactions of daily
business? Is it not legal tender still?
Then away with such nonsense as
! that silver has been demonetized or
| that one-half our metallic money has
been stricken down; or that silver has
/ do not accord with the facts in the
case. Let us speak truly and so be
assisted in our search for truth.
What, then, is the double standard?
! 1t is the employment of egativaIe7lt
units OF the two metals, gold and sill
yer, making both units legal teendr
aUithooH limit and UithOaa restriction upon
the quantity coined. DR.. Lindermann
says: ~ here the ideal unit of the
money of account is represented in
unlimited legal tender gold coin only,
and the value and the legal tender of
| the silver coins is made subordinate
to gold, the gold standard prevails.
Where the monetary unit is repre-
sented in silver coins to the exclusion
| OF the gold as unlimited legal tender,
the silver standard prevails. Where
the unit is represented both by gold
| and silver coins of unlimited legal
| tender value, with unrestricted coin
age, the double standard prevails "
Any restriction upon the legal tender
| quality of either metal, or any restric-
| ton upon the quantity coined, is in
consistent with the double standard
| For, under either limitation, if a
change in the relative value of the
| two metals occurs, causing the coin
| thus limited to be over-valued, the
oVervalued coin cannot become the
standard and drive out the other, but
| will continue to circulate as token
money, while the other becomes the
| sole standard.
1t is an essential preliminary, there
fore, to the employment of the double
standard, that there should be a COM
parative valuation of the two metals.
There must be Il unitary coin, or at
least q unit, of each metal equal in in
trinsic value to the other. The legal
ratio Of values must be the same as
the market ratio, or the two standard
coins will not circulate concurrently,
but the inferior in value will tend to
drive out the superior. Now, history
shows that these two metals have
never maintained the same relative
value for any considerable period,
and every nation which has attempted
to employ the double standard has,
sooner or later, been confronted with
the problem of reimbursement of
values, or the necessity of maintain
ing the parity of the two monetary
units by restricting the coinage of one
or the other of the two metals, and
thereby practically establishing the
single standard.
1t is this constantly recurring and
apparently insuperable difficulty, this
necessity for Legislation to compel the
circulation of the deprecated coin,
which has resulted in the aban comment
of all attempt to employ the double
standard by the most enlightened and
progressive nations of the world. In
view of this fact, and in the light of
the history of the attempts to
establish the double standard, it
would seem that the time were
past for belief, by any intelligent
student of the question, that two
unlimited legal tender metals can oc-
cupy the same field at the same time.
That it is contrary to nature is dem
onstrable in theory and is substanti-
ated by practice. 1t has never sue
ceeded and there is nothing to indi-
cate that it ever can succeed. Time
was when a double standard was pur-
sued, as hope and a possibility by
political economists and practical
financiers of ability, high repute and
sincere purpose, but to-day we may