The news & observer. [volume] (Raleigh, N.C.) 1894-current, 1900-10-04
THE sO-CALLED 5O-CENT DOLLAR

A correspondent of the Springfield
Republican calls its attention to the
use of the term "50-cent dollar and
asks it if a law were passed author
ling free coinage at the ratio of 16 to
/, what would then be it's valued" The
Republican answers the question with
its usual fairness, and effectually dis
poses of the '5O-cent dollar deception.
1t says:
quite possibly a good many peo-
pie, and not a few of them passing as
ordinarily intelligent men, have sup
posed the so-called 50-cent dollar of
the free silver regime would be coin
actually of about the weight and size
of the present 50-cent piece. And in
that case it would be misleading in
way to speak of the silver dollars as
a 5O-cent dollar under free coinage.
What is meant, of course, is that.
valued as bullion in gold, it is worth
so cents. 1t would most certainly be
worth more than that in gold if the
minis were opened to silver on the
same terms as to gold at the 16 to
ratio: for then silver, as the cheaper
metal, would be preferred in settle
ment of obligations, and the monetary
demand now centered upon gold would
go over to silver to the neglect of gold,
thus enhancing the value of silver and
reducing the value of gold. The price
of silver in gold would rise materially;
the price of gold in silver would fau
materially Extreme, bImetalists have
held that the two metals would come
together at the 16 to l ratio on the
opening of the United States minis
alone; we admit that they would APP
proach each other to a considerable
extent-quite likely so far as to make
the silver in the silver dollar worth
rs or so cents in gold, but we question
most decidedly the soundness OF the
prediction that the two dollars would
90 to a parity one with the other. The
addition of one other considerable ma
ton to the scheme, England or France
or Germany, might effect this result,
but in all human probability not the
United States alone.
''Thus it would no doubt be fairer
to say free silver at 10 to l involves
75-cent or an S0-cent dollar, gold valu-
alton, though this would be when gold
had been somewhat deprecated in
terms of silver or commodities. And
the cheaper dollar would, of course
manifest itself only in higher commo-
dity prices. 1t would weigh as much
as now; but it would buy less. And
thus the gold dollar has become a
cheaper dollar than ii was four years
ago. 1t has deprecated materially. 1t
will not buy as much of general com
modities. Prices have risen, and it is
a curious fact that business and money
interests generally rejoice over the
higher prices, and would evidently
hail their going higher as welcome
evidences of increasing prosperity.
And yet the man who lent a gold dol
lar four years ago, in being paid back
the same dollar today, would receive
q cheaper dollar than he lent, less
valuable dollar. 1t will not do, there
fore, for honest money men to boast
of responsibility for policies calculated
to produce a marked advance in
prices, for they thereby proclaim
their attachment to a depreciating
dollar, which is the sin of Vhe silver
men. Radical changes in prices are
never desirable either way. The move
ment, up or down, inflicts great in
justice in debtor and creditor relations
and when, as in the current coal strike,
an advance of prices like that effected
under the gold standard has so far
increased the cost of living as to figure
in the list of the miners grievances,
the public welfare will hardly be con-
suited by a coinage policy calculated
still further to mark up prices