Indian chieftain. [volume] (Vinita, Indian Territory [Okla.]) 1882-1902, 1900-07-26
THE MEASURE OF VALUE
Absurdlty OF the Gold Stand
ard Doctrine.

slons, form anr quality. The use
of a standard" is TO test, by com.
parison with it, the nature, OF
condition, of other things.
Moreover the thing tested by
this standard" must necessarily
bo Of the same nature as the
standard" itself. Length, for
instance, must be tested by apply
ing to IL an agreed modicum of
length; and surface, by an agreed
modicum Of surface; and capacity,
by an agreed modicum of capacity,
and SO on as to everything else.
You could not test the number Of
bushels in a pile Of wheat by APP
plying to it the yard stick, nor the
number of yards in a bolt of cloth
by applying to it the STANDARD"
Of capacity, the bushel measure.
Again the thing tested must
needs have in itself some degree
of persistency, or durability; else
the knowledge gained by the ad-
measurement will be useless.
Take the altitude of a mountain,
and you will have before your
eyes, for all time to come, a prac-
tical view of the result of yolr
labor; but why take the trouble to
measure the height of a sea wave2
Ere your work is done, it is gone,
and you know not that II will ever
again return.
Now let us apply these princi-
Piles. The republican party main.
tain that gold is the sole "stand.
ard" OF value in this country.
But gold, from physical point of
view, is mere piece Of solid mat
ter, mineral, and is classed in
science along with stone, light and
petroleum; whereas value, the
thing to be tested, or measured by
it, is, as we have seen, strictly a
mental phenomenon. There is no
identity of nature between the
"standard" and the thing to be
measured by it. To measure val
ne by a "gold standard" is on
par, in a point Of sense, with an
attempt to measure knowledge in
a standard hsll-bushel; il is ab-
surd.
1t may be said, however, that
the phrase, "gold standard" does
not contemplate the yellow physi-
o.l mass which we call gold, but
the value that is known 10 a@kSr /.
in it; that is to say, the degree of
intensity with which mankind in
general desire to have and own II.
And such an argument would DO
specious enough; for value must e
measured by value, just as dih-
7 akoe lem list 40 Il 81
capacity, by capacity; but, {. 1;
all, it is fallecious in a poii vi
fact.
To illustrate: farmer brind a.
load of wheat into market; ne
knows the number Of bushels, but
the aggregate value in his load, lie
does not know, and he cannot
know, until he meets with a d "a
who has "gold standard" in lis
pocket. They meet, however, 3 I'd
they go to work and compare pe
value in the wheat with the v le
in gold dollar, and it is f. id
that each bushel Of the gra is
worth just seventy-fve cents, y at
is, just three.fourths Of "gSld
standard" dollar. The farmer,
surprised at this, and, addressing
the "gold standard" man rather
sharply, says: "I thought YOU
told me yesterday, sir, that you
were paying a dollar a bushel for
wheat" "And so / did," the
"gold standard" man replies" but
my friend, that was twenty.four
hours ago; since that, sir, gold has
gone up; gone up, sir, one fourth;
and that is virtually saying, your
wheat has gone down to that
amount"
Now this a brief illustration of
what is going on all the tint in
the market of the whole wi lid;
this "gold standard" goes, from
day to day, bobbing up and down
like a shuttlecock.
Hence we see that there is not q
single attribute of a true and re-
liable standard Of valve in gold.
A standard of any kind must not
only be Of the same nature as the
thing to be measured by it, but II
must be permanent, unchangeable,
and always reliable; but gold, as a
standard Of value, fulfills none Of
these conditions.
And yet there is one other diff
Guilty presenting itself just here on
the practical side Of this question.
The vaIue of all other oommod II