AGRICl I.Tl R.\L DISCONTENT 735 



of farm products during the past twenty-three years can be satis- 

 factorily explained as a result of such appreciation. 



The index numbers representing the weighted average price 

 in gold of nine farm products barley, corn, cotton, hemp, meats, 

 rye, tobacco, wheat from 1873 to 1891 are shown in the 

 following table : 



1874 ..... 



n ..... 



.... 



1878 ..... 



1879 ..... 



i ..... 



1881 ..... 



1882 ..... 



Kven a casual survey of these figures shows the utter futility of 

 attributing the movement of farm prices to an appreciation of 

 the monetary standard. Assuming that the lower level of 1891 

 as compared with 1873 is due to appreciation, it is clear that the 

 higher levels of 1874, 1875, 1880, 1881, and 1882 cam 

 thus explained. Still less adequate is the increasing value o! the 

 monetary standard to account for the fluctuations in price of any 

 one farm commodity. Further, the index numbers indicate that 

 the prices of tobacco, rye, meat, and corn were hi -her in 

 than in 1890, while the prices of barley, cotton, and oats 



. In the presence of these facts, the theory that tin- change 

 in tin- priees of farm products finds any adequate explanation 

 in the increasing value of gold breaks down hopelessly. 



I Hi: yean stu il there has occurred from time to 



<1 fall in the products. A 



U-lieve that simultaneously in each instaih took place an 



'Id? The farm price per bushel of the 



corn crop of 1895, for example, was 30 per cent less than the 



nmial price for the ten years preceding. appre- 



ciation of gold or a crop 25 per cent greater than tin annual 



_;e for the preceding decade the more plausihl* ti<>n? 



it the appreciation of gold that made tin t potatoes 



