The representative., 1901-05-02
monopolies. They are in politics more
than any other and they are the powers
that the people should watch. fight and
abolish.
PLAINDEALER ON MONEY.

PLAINDEALER ON MONEY.
Reno. Nevada. April 10. 1901.
D. A. Twftchell. Dear 6ir:-I read your
criticism of Mr.. Maben and disagree with
you 90 entirely that think one Of us must
be mistaken. 1t may be myself. but am
SO sure that am right that / will pay you
quite well to have you point out my errors
and allow me to answer you. I will make
you the following offer: II you viii pub
lish the article on money send you. In the
same type you use In criticising Mr.. Maben
with the SUBJ heads as they are found in
the article, signing my name to It, on re-
ceipts of the paper containing the article l
will send you twenty dollars to pay Tor
your trouble and then l will give you one
hundred dollars to show that my promises.
reasonings and conclusions are false 1t
you do not care to undertake the work
you can publish the offer for the benefit of
your patrons.
Let me point out some Of the differences
between us. One kind of money to me
is just as scientific as any other 1t is in no
sense either a value or a measure Of value
and no comparison can be made between 1t
and the yardstick. It is never redeemed
till it pays back to the power that put 1t
forward. 1t does not rest for it's validity
upon the aggregate wealth OF the nation.
1t has no purchasing power and whatever
the number of the money units in circuia-
dollar of Indebtedness.
Without any request of mine. the article
1t now stands was published by Thomas
E. Watson in 1896. and in commenting upon
it. he pronounced 1t the best campaign
article written that year. I think 1t is the
truth but I may be mistaken. You know,
l think, something of me through the old
Plaindealer and that 1 will perform all
promise / will try and be at Buffalo on
June 18th and at Detroit on July 4th. Hop
ing that may then see you l am.
Respectfully yours.
H. H. HOGAN.
AS will appear from the foregoing letter
Mr.. H. H. Hogan formerly edited The
Plaindealer.' The Plaindealer was we'll
edited paper and did much good work as
a Populist organ. We publish this letter
out of respect for Mr.. Hogan as a co-worker
and brother editor and incidentally to COM
ment on some Of his financial theories.
The article he challenges us to publish is
16 columns In length. and publication OF
such long drawn out argument works dis
aster to our subscription list and quite
possible was the disease fatal to the
"Plaindealer."
In this letter Mr. Hogan has defined his
position much more concisely than in his
16 column article. He says: "One kind of
money to me is just as scientific as any
other"
This seems to us a strange assertion
well informed upon the money question.
Wampum, pieces of leather. iron, tobacco,
shells and various similar articles have in
the worlds history been used as money.
None of these articles carried any SOW
ereign stamp. there was no system or
method by which the quantity of such
money was limited. In most instances the
acceptance of such money rested upon COM
mon consent rather than upon force of any
legal tender statute. Nevertheless these
articles were money and performed every
function ever performed by any kind of
money Scientific money Is money that is
issued or put out by some system or method
that will insure the money unit, ex-
changing always for approximately the
same value in products.
None of the above mentioned articles
ever possessed this comparative stability
of exchange power because there was no
method or system in the manner Of ISSUE
The Cincinnati convention declared for
scientific money. Is 1t probable that the
whole Populist party used a meaningless
term or is 1t more probable that Mr.. Hogan
has failed to comprehend some of the es-
sentfal elements Of money? In this particu-
lar we assume that the question Of whether
any money can be properly called scientific
rests between Mr. Hogan standing alone
against all the best authorities on finance
and the entire Populist party. This may
not prove Mr.. HOgans conclusions "false"
but it places Mr.. Hogan in the position Of
the 18th juror against the other eleven.
Again Mr.. Hogan says: "It is in no sense
either value or measure of values, and no
comparison can be made between it and the
yard stick" Here Mr.. Hogan stands alone
in opinion. He can find no writer of any
prominence to sustain these assertions Let
US. however. reason on this question. A
offers B $1,000 for his farm B asks for the
farm $4,000. and what is the process by
which they get together and finally con
summate deal? The process is this The
two men discuss and consider the exchange
equivalent of the dollars in well known
commodities. They then determine the ex-
change equivalent of the farm in the same
commodities. Having gone through these
processes, they compare results and con-
clude that the exchange equivalent of the
farm is 800 bushels of wheat and the ex-
change equivalent of 1900 bushels of wheat
is $500; hence fair exchange would COM
pei to pay $500 for his farm. All
writer's On finance define value as a COM
parative quantity. There are two points Of
difference between the yard stick and the
dollar as a measure. The yard stick al
ways measures the same, while our present
unscientihc dollar Is constantly varying
The dollar transfers, carries or represents
value In such manner that it's possessor can
convert commodities on the Atlantic coast
into dollars, carry the dollars In his pocket
to California, and reconvert it into com
modities. This he cannot do with the yard
stick. But the capacity for measuring and
comparing commodities to ascertain their
relative value is alike in the dollar and in
the yard stick
Finally, Mr.. Hogan makes what he seems
to think an unanswerable argument against
the quantitative theory of money. Here
again all the authorities are against him.
He says: TT has no purchasing power, and
whatever the number of money units in
circulation, one dollar in money only pays
dollar in in6ahfn6nocc -
This Is a most unfair jugglery of words
The exchange equivalent Of the dollar, and
consequently of all debts expressed in dol
lars, varies with the number of units out.
When the number of units is contracted and
the dollar made dearer, debts are increased
in the same order.
The debt expressed in dollars is the same
but expressed in commodities labor it
may have been doubled Mr.. Hogan is very
careless and inaccurate in the use, of some
of his language. If money has no pur-
chasing power. Mr.. Hogan should explain
ties every day of the year. If money has
no value and does not measure value, how
would Mr.. Hogan define that attribute of
money which makes men always willing to
accept it in exchange for valuable products?
Mr.. Hogan SEEMS inclined to split hairs
HEREFORDs.
The president is appointing gold Demo-
Gratis to Office in the South, and there is
evidence that these appointees are joining
with the white Republicans in the forma-
tion Of new party which will exclude the
negro. AS the white-face will be the dis
tipguishing characteristic of the members
of this new party, they will probably be
known as the Hereford Republicans.-Com-
moner.
Perhaps Mr. Bryan has not discover