The Forrest City times. [volume] (Forrest City, Ark.) 1871-1919, 1898-01-07
THE COST os Silver.
a Puerile Attack by . Goidbua
Sophist.

n Puerfle Attack by q Gofdbu2
sophist.
Edward Atkinson declares that the
silver issue is dead and then straight
way sends out 20-page pamphlet to 40
newspapers in 40 states for the purpose
OF helping to kill II again. He imagines
that he has dealt il terrific blow, in
demonstrating Ito his own satisfaction)
that two of the best silver mines in
the world have been able to produce sill
yer at a cost of from 25 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 eoun-
try" and again: 1T is impossible for
n private person to get the data neces-
sary to the solution of this problem.
either in regard 10 the great mines of
Mexico, South America or any other
silver producing country, except New
South Wales"
He acknowledges that he knows moth
ing of the thousands of sources of sill
yer production. except of two mines,
one in the United States and one in New
South Wales. His evident intention is
to start the cry of low cost of producing
silver bullion. He is more than willing
that this sophistry should be used as a
bludgeon in the hands of the gold stand
ard men. Not word does he say about
the silver mines that are closed because
the price of silver is below the cost Of
productions; not word about the mines
that bankrupted themselves producing
silver at great loss in hopes that the
price would improve.
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 state. The aver
age yield per acre of corn last year was
2S.2 bushels. Yet a man in Illinois this
last season raised 1856 bushels on an
acre. Figured on the latter yield. the
cost per bushel Of raising corn would
have been very small. and every farm
er could have made a profit on ten-cent
corn. But the absurdity of both esti-
mates is apparent.
But. after all. the cost of producing
a thing has no bearing whatever on its
market value. This is regulated entire
ly by the quantity obtainable and by it's
use. We call this principle "the law Of
supply and demand" 1t really makes
no difference whether silver costs 25
cents an ounce or nothing. It's value
will dependon its quantity and use.
Mr.. Atkinson seems to be figuring out
that silver is cheaper than 25 years ago
because it can be produced at less cost.
Apply the same rule to gold: gold can
be produced at less cost than II could
be 25 years ago, and. according 10 the
reasoning of Mr.. Atkinson. should be
worth less in the products of the world.
But gold is more valuable than ever.
That the cost Of production does not
regulate price is shown by many arti-
cles of commerce. Ambergris is very
valuable substance. single Jumps Of It
being sold for fortunes. Yet it is large
ly find. 1t is valuable as 1t is scarce.
II 1t were priced according to its cost,
II would sell for about nothing. The
writings of some men have high mar
ket value simply because there Is de-
mand for them that exhausts the sup
ply. And that is all there Is to the sill
yer question. Allow II it's legitimate
use and the demand will exhaust the
supply. Pass law prohibiting any GER
tain newspaper from using the mails
and see whether you cannot legislate
value out of anything. You have not
lessened the cost of producing the news
paper. but you have interfered with
its use and lessened the value of IL as
property.
This latest attack on silver by Mr..
Atkinson is puerile. It Is nil based on
the assumed lessened cost Of producing
silver. His argument applies equally
as well to gold as to silver.
If the low price OF silver were due to
the low cost Of production. then tho
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 sixteen to
one. That silver has fallen in value and
gold risen proves the fallacy of Mr.. At
kinson's argument.
Hr rgIrRSTON