Hutchinson gazette., 1897-08-19


value? Yes. Can there be double
standard of measure? No! Why this
difference? If dollar should contain
a given amount of silver or given
amount of gold, the cheaper will be
used until the increased demand for
the one and the decreased demand for
the other will increase the value of the
one most used, and decrease the value
of the other until their v.llues will ap-
proXimate and remain about the same
in given ratio. This was true of gold
and silver for many centuries previous
to the early 7Os, when, without the
knowledge or consent of the masses OF
the people, one of these metals was set
aside as final measure of value. The
schemers operating this game operated
in Europe as we'll as in this country.
In the early SOS they tried to demon
etize gold. Their arguments then are
amusing now. The California discov-
cries were their slogan, and they said
that gold was "cheap," mot fit for
money" etc. Germany actually de-
monetized it. But in the early '7O's
they reversed their tactics and demon
etized silver in order to increase the
value Of money by limiting its amount
! They succeeded all too we'll
+ \ 4 =
Now, let us turn to the first ques-
tion. Is money legal creation? Did
you ever see any money that wasn't?
1 will give S10O for 81 that wasn't is
sued by legal authority. and yet is 81.
This same principle of legal creation"
applies not only to dollars, but to all
money. l have in my possession an
old papal coin. IG was money in the
papal states in the time of the pope
who issued it; but as the legal authori-
ty which issued it has disappeared, it's
money function has disappeared, and
its only value now is the metal that
composes it; or the coin as a curio.
have before me silver coin dated 1865
Its money function has long since de-
parted, its value now being rs curio
So the legal creation of money is no
new thing. Money is u creature Of
law, a creation of law, in the country
/ by whose authority it was issued; but
when it goes into other countries it is
treated as commodity. In this event
the gold is weighed and valued as if it
were bullion; but paper money is valu-
ed according to the value of commoli-
ties it will purchase in its own couu-
try, minus carriage. We treat foreign
money in the same way. French money
is not money in this country, because
French laws do not "go' in this coun-
try; but it has its value with us as a
commodity, or according to the com
modities it will command in France,
minus carriage, etc. Money is success
full or unsuccessful, according to the
wealth and power OF the issuing au-
thority, unless the money is printed on
a substance of equal value to the
money value printed thereon. This
last is common mistake even among
wealthy and powerful nations.
And this brings us to the last part of
the first question. The question itself
is grotesque absurdity. 1t violates
all known theories of money. Ifmoney
is measure of value, it must main
tain q constant relation to the values
to be measured. Ii you define it as a
medium of exchange, it must maintain
constant relation among the COM
modities to be exchanged.
We will assume rs settled that money
is legal creation until somebody is
able to show us some money not so
created. Perhaps some one will claim
that gold dollar that a railroad train
has run oyer, effacing every trace of
the governments stamp, is still Col
lar, because the gold in it is worth
collar. But not So You might as
well claim that dollars worth of any
thing else is dollar. The piece of
gold would not be legal tender for
taxes nor debit would not be a dol
ar. 1t could be sold to q bullion deal
er for its commercial value just like
anything else, but it would no longer
be dollar any more than dollars |
worth of anything else would be dol
lar. Perhaps some one might seek to
disprove my statement by negative,
citing the Confederate money or the
Continental money as failures of law
to create money, therefore law cannot
create money. Not so. There are fail
ures in everything. The Confederate
money would have continued good if
the authority issuing it could have
maintained it. The Continental money
was largely over-issued, and also ex-
tensively counterfeited by England,
and at the close of the war, the contiu-
uation of which it made possible, it
was dropped by general consent of the