Freeland tribune. (Freeland, Pa.) 1888-1921, 1896-08-13

our sister republic to remind our people
that the United States is much greater
than Mexico in arca, in population and in
commercial strength. 1t Is absurd to as
scrt that tie United States is not able to
do anything which Mexico has failed to
accomplish. Tic orc thing necessary in
order to maintain tie parity IS to furnish
demand great enough to utilize al tie
silver which will come to the miuts. That
Mexico has failed to do this is not proof
that the United States would also fail.
1t is also argued that, since number of
the nations have dcmoneti2cd silver, moth
ing oan lie done until all of those nations
restore himctullisn. This is also illogical
1t is immaterial how many or how few
nations have olon mints, provided there
are sufficient open mints to furnish n mon
ctary demand for all the gold and silver
available for coinage.
In reply to the argument that improved
machinery has lesscncd the cost Of produc-
ing silver, it is sufficient to say that the
same is true of the production of gold, and
yet, Notwithstanding that, gold has risen
in value As Il matter OF fact, the cost of
production does not determine the value
of the precious metals, except as it may
affect the supply. If, for instance, tie cost
of producing gold should lie reduced 90
per cent without any increase in the out
put, the purchasing power Of an ounce of
gold would not fall. 80 long as there is
n monetary demand sufficient to take at a
fixed mint price all the gold and silver
produced the cost of production need not
be considered.
Prices of Gold and Silver.
It is often objected that the prices of
gold and silver cannot be fixed in relation
to each other because of the variation in
tho relative production of thcmGtalS This
argument also oVcrluoks the fact that. if
the demand for both metals ut II fixed price
Is greater than the supply of both, relative
| production becomes immaterial In the
carly part Of the present century the an
nual production of silver was worth, at
tho coinage ratio, about three times as
much as the annual production of gold,
Whereas soon after 1919, the annual pro
ductiCn of gold became worth about three
times us much, mt the coinage ratio, as the
annIgl production of silver, ana yet, Cw-
ing to the maintenance of the bimetallic
standard, these enormous changes in rcla-
tive production had but slight effect up
on the relative values Of the metals
If it is asserted hy our opponents that
the free coinage Of silver is intended only
ZOE b4O tittl.J bl INC llili!c tNHtlS, IL lNNSU
be remembered that FREQ coinage cannot
restore to the mine owners any moro than
| demonstration took away, and il must
also be remcmbered that the loss Which
the dcmoncti2ation of silver has brought
to the mine owners is insignificant com
pared to the loss which this policy has
| brought to the rest Of the ICoElc. The res
toration of silver viii bring to the people
generally many times IS much advantage
as the mino owners can obtain from it.
While ii is not tho purpose of free coinage
to specially aid any particular class, yet
| those who believe that the restoration of
silver il needed by the whole PEOPLE should
not be deferred because an incidental ben
| eft will como to the mine owner. The cree
| ton of forts the deepening OF harburs,
| the improvement of rivers, the erection of
| public buildings, all thee confcr Incl
| dental benefits upon individuals AID com
muniti.'s, and yet these incidental benefits
do not deter us from making appropria-
| tions for these purpose whenever such ap-
| prOpria,ionS are necessary for the public
4 good
The argument that silver dollar is
heavier than II gold dollar, and that there
fore silver Is less convenient TO carry in
| large quantities, is completely answered
carried as tho gold certificate or any other
kind of paper money.
As to tho Present Ratio.
There gro somo who, whiIo cdmitting
| the bencHs Of Linet&ilism, object to coin
| age ut the prcscat ratio. Ii any are dcacv-
ell by this objection, they ought To ramcm-
| her that there are no bimc,allist3 who trc
earnestly cnGc;WCring to fcsuGe IL at any
| other ratio than IL II 1. We arc opposcd
to any change in the ratio for two rca sons
| first, because II change would produce
| great injustice, AID, Gcaoud, Gcc&uso u
change in the ratio is not necessary A
change would produce Injustice because,
| il effected in the manECT usually suggc t,
| ed, ii would result in N enormous con-
traction in tho volume OF standard money.
| If, for instance, il was decided by inter
! national agreement to raise the radios
throughout the world to 81 TO /, the change
might be effected in any one of three
ways
The silver dollar could DO doubled in
size, 50 that tho new silver dollar would
weigh s. times c5 much as the present gold
dollar, Or the Present geld dollar could be
reduced one half in weight, 50 that the
| present silver dollar would weigh 33 times
as much aS the new gold dollar or the
! cnange tpulil 70 made by increasing the
size of tAo silver dollar and decreasing the
size of the god dollar until the new silver
dollar would weigh 33 times as much us
the new gold dollar Those who have nd
Vised change in the ratio have usually
suggested that tho silver dollar bo doubled.
If this change were made, it would ncccs-
state the rcgoinugo of 4, ,O00, coo, 900 Of sill
vcr into 81 600 600, Geo. There would bo
an immediate loss Of $4,000, 900, 900 either
to individuals on to the government but
this would ho the least Of the injury. A
shrinkugc Of oue-half in the silver money
of the world would mean IL shrinhage OF
one-fourth in The to,al volume Of metallic
money. This contraction, by Increasing
the value Of the dollar, would virtually
increase the debts Of the world billions of
dollars and decrease still more tho value OF
the property Of the world as measured by
dollars Besides this Immediate result
such Il change in the ratio would pcrma-
ncntly decrease the III nual addition 20 tho
worlds supply of money, because tho an
nual silver lr3duct, when coined into dol
lars twice rs large, would make only half