The Salt Lake herald. [volume] (Salt Lake City [Utah]) 1870-1909, 1900-03-29

gan has truly said. by the gold stand
ard money contraction, there was abso-
luteiy no demand for lead, and the
price on the American market fell TO
$3.50 per hundred, under a. tariff of Is
cents per hundred. This price of $3.50,
according to Republican authority, was
less taan the cost of foreign lead laid
down at New York Hence. had the tar
if rate been $40 per pound, it would
not have increased the New York price
one cent because the market had been
destroyed by the gold standard blight.
The tariff on lead was advanced IS
cents per hundred to s1.5O. Then came
a flood of gold from Alaska; the adj
ministration placed $500, 0OO, 900 of bor-
roweG money in circulation. This tenn
pOrary increase in the circulation
caused a general industrial revival.
just as the Democrats had contended
would he the case We're the circula-
ton increased by bimetaIlism, and the
price Of lead advanced, not rs cents. the
amount of the tariff increase. but 81
per hundred.
Thus the gold standard contraction re-
duced the price of lead to a point be-
low the cost OF foreign production. and
a temporary and accidental increase in
the circulation advanced the price an
amount three times greater than the
tariff increase. DO these facts furnish
any argument in favor Of the perma-
nent establishment of the gold stand
ard or against such a permanent
increase in the volume Of money
as bimetaIism would create? What
form of idiocy has driven this Hanna
organ into such a position? Or is it
but the desperation of a baffled bull
dozer. whose motto is Anything TO
beat the Democrats?
There is no one in Utah who will not
rejoice with the lead producers and
the wool growers over the advances in
the prices Of their products. But when
the lead miners are told that because
Of an advance of IS cents in the tariff
the price of their product has adj
vanoed %, and that they should there
fore endorse the gold standard, it is
quite apparent that an inquirendo de
If some Utah producers enjoy a
share in the advance of prices caused
by temporary increase in the volume
of money, why should they not endorse
a financial policy that would ensure q
permanent increase, in which all could
share. and which would promote such
an industrial revival that they could
not supply the demand for their pro-
ducts?
If the lead miners of this state con-
suit their own interests, there ought to
be no question as to whom they will
support in this campaign. It is true
that there are a small number of gold
standard Republicans who chance to
be interested in lead mines and seek
to juggle the lead question in such a
way as to show that Republican sue
cess will benefit them. But they are
politicians, rather than miners, and
would plead some other excuse for
supporting Hanna if they owned no
stock in lead producing mines.
1t is not conceivable that honest lead
miners, understanding the situation,
should turn from candidate VINO
fought for an increase in the lead tar
if and who stands Cor a financial pol
icy that would 90 more than any tar
if to advance the price Of their pro-
duct, and support 8 candidate who is
under no party pledge to any measure
of protection, but whose vote would
always be cast to strengthen the smell
ter trust, the lead trust, and all other
trusts inimical to the miners inter-
ests.