sibly, indeed, if the production of silver had not overtaken the production of gold, the old ratio of 15 or 16 to 1 would be maintainable. In other words, if 15 or 16 to 1 was the proper ratio when "three times as much gold" was produced as silver, then 15 or 16 to 1 cannot possibly be the proper ratio to-day. The world's markets say that to-day's ratio is about 21 to 1,' and, in view of the figures above given, I do not see how Mr. Stewart can reasonably find fault with the world's opinion.

If we say that the growth of business demands an ever increasing supply of money, losing sight of the fact that banking facilities keep pace with business and largely supply its needs, making a dollar more and more important as a measure of value and less and less important as a means of exchange; or, if we say that an annually increasing crop of money is needed just as much as we need an annually increasing crop of wheat, losing sight of the fact that wheat is consumed while money is largely preserved, still we have no ground for assuming that there is any

11896. About 31 to 1.

need for the disproportionately great production of silver. On the contrary, the fall in the price of silver, from $1.29 per ounce to ninety-seven cents per ounce,' shows that no matter how badly the world needs money, it prefers all the evils of the shortage rather than the use of more silver. The worthy advocate of silver may insist that the world is mistaken in this choice, but certain it is that the world has made such a choice, else the parity of 15 or 16 to 1 would never have changed to that of 21 to 1.2

Let me here make again the distinction between money and wealth, terms too frequently used as synonymous. There is always an insatiable demand for wealth, but the demand for money is limited, like the demand for a commodity. More closely limited, of course, is the demand for a kind of money upon which suspicion has

been cast.

The whole world, however, does not take the same view of silver. It is good enough money yet for some countries, and there is left open to Senator Stewart the

1 18.6. About sixty-eight cents.

2 Now about 31 to 1.

course of educating the people of Europe and the United States up to the standard of China, India,' Peru and Mexico! After all, a mere free-coinage or unlimited-purchase bill could have little effect upon the price of silver compared to such an effect as would come from teaching civilized people that they ought to carry the white metal and overlook its depreciation. Education strikes at the root of the evil; any act of Congress may be undone by a subsequent Congress!

In the column next to the one containing the Senator's assurance of an "impossibility of a flood of silver," August 18th, the newspaper said: Silver is top-heavy. (It was.) There is much talk of a flood of silver from over the water. Holland has 149,000,000 florins in the treasury for which there is no call in circulation. The Dutch and German ministers think they will take no more chances, but will sell their silver this year; and more news, or rumors, of this tenor. It is, of course, a matter of conjecture what European gov

1 Even in India free-coinage found its limit, and was stopped in 1893.

ernments will do, but it cannot be questioned that their actions for eighteen years indicate a strong desire to obtain gold and to give silver in exchange.'

What European ministers say, is a ques tion of policy, and if a government wish to give silver for gold that government's financial minister cannot be expected to say anything which would weaken the cause of free coinage or unlimited purchase in America. To get rid of silver he must have a market; to obtain gold he must have a source of supply. Under free coinage or unlimited purchase we should furnish both. Perhaps, however, Senator Stewart will be more easily convinced that there is a European demand for gold if I use his own words:

"I called attention to the fact that all the great monetary institutions in Europe and America, where the gold standard is maintained, were deficient in reserves to meet their obligations, and they were struggling for more gold and reducing credits to save themselves from bankruptcy."

1 1896. Austria-Hungary is accumulating gold, having decided upon gold resumption. Silver has proved burdensome.

Possibly Mr. Stewart may have been posing as a world's philanthropist, for in another place he said:

"We have already shown that gold would be cheaper in Europe if they had more of it, as they would have if they had all the gold in this country, and in that case he (the debtor) could get more gold for the same property than he now can, and could pay his debts with less sacrifice, no matter whether his debt was a gold obligation or an obligation to obligation to pay in the currency of the United States.”

The benefit to Europe from having our gold is perfectly clear; not so the benefit to us from losing our gold, one third of our circulating medium, even if we could be summarily educated up to the belief that silver is just as good as gold.

The Senator says that if I "had taken the trouble to read" one of his articles I "would have been saved the trouble of many mistakes and erroneous statements with regard to paying $1.29 for a dollar's worth of silver." According to the Sena tor there is, then, an important, and not