The Louisiana populist., 1898-01-28
COST OF SILVER BULLION.

it again. He imagines that he has
dealt it terrific blow in demonstrate
ing Ito his own satisfaction that two
OF the best silver mines in the world
have been able to produce silver at a
cost of from rs to As cents an ounce,
He does not attempt to give the cost of
production by the multitude of other
and less profitable mines in the world.
IN fact, he says: There is no method
OF determining what are the conditions
IN other mines in this country" and
again: 1T is impossible for private
person to get the data necessary to the
solution of this problem, either in re-
gard to the great mines of Mexico,
South America or any other silver-pro-
ducing country, except New South
Wales"
He acknowledges that he knows
nothing Of the thousands of sources Of
Silver production, except of two mines,
one in the United States, and one in
New South Wales. His evident inten-
tion is to start the cry of low cost of
producing silver bullion. He is more
than willing that this sophistry should
be used as bludgeon in the hands of
the gold standard men. Not a word
does he say about the silver mines that
are closed because the price of silver is
below the cost Of production; not a
word about the mines that bankrupted
themselves producing silver at a great
loss in hopes that the price would i'm
prove.
His estimate is worth about as much
| as would be an estimate on the average
cost of raising wheat based on the
largest acre yield in a state. The av-
erage yield of corn per acre last year
was 2S.2 bushels. Yet a man in Illi-
nois this last season raised 166 bushels
on an acre. Figured on the latter
yield, the cost per bushel of raising
corn would have been very small, and
every farmer could have made profit
on 1O-cent corn. But the absurdity of
both estimates is apparent.
But, after all, the cost of producing
thing has no bearing whatever on
its market value. This is regulated en-
tirely by the quantity obtainable and
by its use. We call this principle "the
law of supply and demand" 1t really
makes no difference whether silver
costs Is cents an ounce or nothing. Its
value will depend on it's quantity and
use.
Mr.. Atkinson seems to be figuring
out that silver is cheaper than twenty
five years ago because it can be pro-
duced at less cost. Apply the same rule
to gold; gold can be produced at less
cost than 1t could be twenty-five years
ago, and, according to the reasoning of
Mr.. Atkinson, should be worth less in
the products of the world. But gold is
more valuable than ever.
That cost of production does not reg
ulate price is shown by many articles
Of commerce. Ambergris is very val
liable substance, single Jumps of it be-
ing sold for fortunes Yet it is largely
find 1t is valuable as it is scarce.
If it were priced according to its cost,
it would sell for about nothing. The
writings of some men have high mar
ket value simply because there is a
demand for them that exhausts the
supply. And that is all there is to the
silver question. Allow it it's legitimate
use, and the demand will exhaust the
supply. Pass law prohibiting any
certain newspaper from using the
mails, and see whether you cannot leg
islate value out of anything You have
not lessened the cost Of producing the
newspaper, but you have interfered
with its use and lessened the value Of
it as property.
This latest attack on silver by Mr..
Atkinson is puerile. 1t is all based on
the assumed lessened cost of produc-
ing silver. His argument applies equal
ly as we'll to gold as to silver.
If the low price of silver were due to
the low cost of production, then the
value of gold would have fallen in the
same proportion, due to low cost Of
producing gold, and both metals would
still be near their old par OF 16 to l.
That silver has fallen in value and gold
risen proves the fallacy of Mr.. Atkin-
sons argument.-H. F. Thurston.