464 
TUNE 20 
THE RURAL NEW-YORKER. 
to the party and gave the results which were very satis¬ 
factory and led to the wide distribution of this feed. My 
objection to the meal for horses and pigs was its highly 
nitrogenous and consequent inflammatory character, 
which I was so confident about that I refused to feed it to 
these animals and cautioned my hired man who did the 
feeding not to give it to them. But he, noticing the good 
effect on the cows which was shown by the increase in the 
milk yield, thought it should be equally good for the pigs 
and began to feed it to a pen of young shoats. In a few 
days these were all taken with inflammation of the brain, 
the commonly called blind staggers, and one died; the rest 
recovered under prompt treatment. On post mortem ex¬ 
amination the kidneys were found to be highly congested 
and the brain even more so; the surface of it, the menin¬ 
geal membrane, was dark red and even blue in large 
patches from the excessive congestion. It turned out, as I 
expected, that the urinary organs were overtaxed to get 
rid of the excess of nitrogenous matter in the blood, and 
the brain became violently inflamed in consequence of the 
inability of the system to oxidize and get rid of the excess 
of albuminoids of the food. And this I believe is the 
reason why this meal will never be fit food for pigs. H. s. 
Rooting for Cheap Stock Food.—A good many ensi¬ 
lage people appear to think that the silo will make root 
growing a “ back number.” This note comes from a Ver¬ 
mont subscriber: “ On page 418 I notice some pithy re¬ 
marks with regard to Prof. Massey, who has ensilage on 
the brain, by a gentleman who can raise mangolds for five 
cents a bushel and place them in the cellar. I have 
ensilage and roots both on the brain, but thus far my 
roots have cost me too much money. It would please me 
very much if the The Rural would induce this corre¬ 
spondent to tell us how beets can be raised for the least 
amount of money. We all know they are valuable, and 
what we all want is to make a dollar profit in the business.” 
R. N.-Y.—We know of a good many farmers who are 
growing both roots and ensilage corn with success. The 
roots are fed out before the silos are opened and prove ex¬ 
cellent for fall feeding after the frosts have killed the 
grass. This; of course, is the practice of farmers in far 
northern latitudes where winter begins early and stays 
late. The same practice may not be advisable for farmers 
In warmer climates where grass keeps green longer in the 
season. By all means let us have the figures. 
Farm Politics. 
Here it is proposed to discuss with freedom and fairness, ques¬ 
tions of National or State policy that particularly concern farm¬ 
ers. The editors disclaim responsibility for the opinions of cor-' 
respondents. The object is to develop a true and fair basis for 
organization among farmers. Let us think out just what we want 
and then strive for it. 
BIMETALLISM. 
The first condition necessary to an intelligent discussion 
is agreement as to the meaning of words. In the editorial 
comment on the very forcible letter of “ A. F. H.,” page 
144, I find this statement: “ Bimetallism * * * has 
been tried too long in this and other countries, without 
any such disastrous consequences, to permit us to take so 
gloomy a view of its reestablishment, after an interval of 
only 17 years.” What is the meaning of “ bimetallism ” 
as used in the paragraph quoted ? From the context it 
would appear to mean the free coinage of both metals. If 
used in that sense, to what countries does the statement 
apply ? Does the writer mean that in former times when, 
silver coin being worth more than gold, under the 
operation of Gresham’s Law, it was driven out of circula¬ 
tion, except as fractional currency, among the commercial 
nations, when, although theoretically bimetallism existed, 
there was practically monometallism ? Seventeen years 
ago, the great commercial nations, having all practically a 
gold standard, were in harmony in their exchanges. 
Whether an agreement of all of them for free coinage, at 
a fixed ratio, could make such a ratio of permanent value, 
is a question upon which authorities differ, though none 
doubt that free coinage by us, at the present ratio, would 
speedily give us monometallism, and that one metal, sil¬ 
ver. All exchanges with the other commercial nations 
would then be through the medium of something which is 
a commodity, the present value of which would, like that 
of wheat or corn, have to be calculated for each transac¬ 
tion. 
To parry the objection that a change in the measure im 
pairs the obligation of contracts, all these now existing 
having been made with reference to our present lawful 
money, the writer in The Rural speaks of the hardship 
lately endured by the borrowers of depreciated currency. 
Such borrowers had full knowledge that the government 
promised to redeem in gold, and would do so, as soon as 
possible. No one has had notice that the government 
would compel him to take 80 cents’ worth of depreciated 
silver for every dollar deposited in a savings bank. It Is 
pleaded that the value of gold is appreciating, and that 
debtors are therefore compelled to pay more in intrinsic 
value than they borrowed, and that it is but fair to relieve 
them by law. Is the fact of appreciation In value of gold es¬ 
tablished ? What is the measure of value ? Labor is the 
great commodity of the world, and is the element in combi¬ 
nation which gives nearly the whole value to all com¬ 
modities. Gold, measured by the price of labor, is con¬ 
stantly depreciating in value, in all civilized countries. 
But if the facts were as asserted, and such interferences 
by government can be justified, it were far better to do 
it directly, by clipping the gold dollars. Such a measure 
would impair the obligation of contracts, but would not 
hinder foreign commerce, or give us a barbarian circulat¬ 
ing medium. Nor would it bring the disasters so forcibly 
depicted by “ A. F. H.,” consequent upon the sudden lock¬ 
ing up of the gold. A. J. COE. 
New Haven Co., Conn. 
R N.-Y.—We know of no other meaning for the word 
“ bimetallism ” than that indicated in the context on page 
144 of The Rural, and repeated hereby our correspondent. 
What other meaning could he assign to it ? In that sense to 
what civilized country in the whole world is not the state¬ 
ment applicable f Until these, our days, gold and silver have 
both been freely coined as standards of value in all the civil¬ 
ized world for over 3,000 years. Occasionally one metal has 
been demonetized for short intervals in one country or 
another, and occasionally the other; but it can be fairly 
said that both have been concurrently the standards of 
value of the world from prehistoric ages. The relative value 
has varied somewhat, but for the last three centuries or 
more has been remarkably constant. Of late years there has 
been a powerful tendency among the creditor classes and 
those having regular Incomes to curtail the volume of the 
currency by demonetizing one of the metals in order to en¬ 
hance the value of the other, and thus appreciate the 
worth of their own holdings. That this would be the effect 
of such a measure is clearly shown by the opinions of 
some of the most renowned political economists. 
R. M. T. Hunter, in his report to the United States Senate 
in 1852, says : “ To adopt gold alone would be to diminish 
the specie currency more than one half.” 
In 1868, M. Wolowski declared: “The suppression of 
silver would bring on a veritable revolution. Gold would 
augment In value with a rapid and constant progress, 
which would break the faith of contracts and aggravate 
the situation of all debtors, including the nation. It would 
add at one stroke of the pen at least three milliards to the 
twelve milliards of the public debt ” in France. 
In 1843, L6on Fauchet said: “ If all the nations of Europe 
adopted the system of Great Britain”—monometallism— 
“ the price of gold would be raised beyond measure and we 
should produce in Europe a most lamentable result.” 
In 1873, Lavaleye said: “ Debtors, and among them the 
State, have the right to pay in gold or silver, and this right 
can not be taken away without disturbing the relation of 
debtors and creditors, to the prejudice of debtors, to the 
extent of perhaps one half, certainly of one-third.” 
Before the French monetary convention in 1869 testi¬ 
mony was given by three famous financiers : M. Wolowski, 
M. Rouland and Baron Rothschild. 
M. Wolowski said: “ The sum total of the precious 
metals is reckoned at fifty milliards, one-half gold and 
one-half silver. If, by a stroke of the pen, they suppress 
one of these metals in the monetary service, they double 
the demand for the other metal, to the ruin of all debtors.” 
M. Rouland, Governor of the Bank of France, said: 
“ We have not to do with ideal theories. The two moneys 
have actually co existed since the origin of human society. 
They co-exist because the two together are necessary, by 
their quantity, to meet the needs of circulation. This neces¬ 
sity of the two metals, has it ceased to exist ? Is it estab¬ 
lished that the quantity of actual and prospective gold is 
such that we can now renounce the use of silver without 
disaster ?” 
Baron Rothschild said : “ The simultaneous employment 
of the two precious metals is satisfactory and gives rise to 
no complaint. Whether gold or silver dominates for the 
time being, It is always true that the two metals concur 
together in forming the monetary circulation of the world, 
and it is the general mass of the two metals combined 
which serves as the measure of the value of things. The 
suppression of silver would amount to a veritable destruc¬ 
tion of values without any compensation.” 
The following are to day the gold using, and the silver 
and paper using countries of the world: 
Gold using countries: Canada, Belgium, Denmark, 
France, Germany, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, Nether¬ 
lands, Portugal and its possessions, Spain, Sweden and 
Norway, Turkey, British possessions in Africa, British 
possessions in Australia. 
Silver and paper using countries: Austria-Hungary, 
Russia, Mexico, Central America, Hawaii, Argentine 
Republic, Brazil, Chili, Peru, Colombia, Uruguay, Vene¬ 
zuela, Cuba, Hayti, Porto Rico, British West Indies, Dutch 
West Indies, China, British India, Dutch India and Japan. 
England, the greatest creditor nation the world has ever 
seen, was the first to inaugurate this system by demonet¬ 
izing silver, in 1819, when flushed with her triumph over 
Napoleon. Her motive is clearly enunciated in the report 
of the Royal Commission of 1868 on the changes in the 
relative values of the precious metals. On page 90, part 
II, we find this candid declaration: “It must be remem¬ 
bered, too, that this country is largely a creditor country, 
of debts payable in gold, and any change which entails a 
rise in the price of commodities generally ; that is to say, 
a diminution of the purchasing power of gold would be to 
our disadvantage.” 
In 1819 as well as to day the money power in England 
was omnipotent, and by demonetizing one of the precious 
metals it vastly increased the value of the other, to Its own 
immense advantage and the great loss of all other classes 
in the country. Moreover, the debts due to it by all parts 
of the rest of the world had to be paid in the appreciated 
currency—a mighty good thing for the creditors. In recent 
days other countries, under the same impulse from the 
creditor and annuitant classes, have followed the example 
of England, some demonetizing one metal and some the 
other and some changing from one to the other. The 
metal first selected for demonetization was, not silver, but 
gold, and in 1857 Germany, Austria and Belgium demone¬ 
tized the latter. The creditor classes, however—the 
money-lenders, annuitants and those with fixed incomes— 
soon realizing that they would gain more by demonetizing 
gold, brought an irresistible pressure to bear on the Bel¬ 
gian and German governments to induce them to make 
the change. The history of the change from bimetallism 
to monometallism in the above-mentioned countries within 
the past 25 years would be too long a theme for this place ; 
but it must be borne in mind that although the amount of 
available gold might be enough to supply a single coun¬ 
try, even such as England, with a sufficiency of circulat¬ 
ing medium, It would not follow that it could supply a 
sufficiency for all the countries that have adopted it as the 
only standard of value of late years. Of the effects of an 
abundance and stringency in the currency, a few opinions 
of well-known political economists may not be out of 
place here. 
David Hume, in his essay on money, says : “ We find 
that in every kingdom into which money begins to flow 
in greater abundance than formerly, everything takes a 
new face; labor and industry gain life; the merchant be¬ 
comes more enterprising, the manufacturer more diligent 
and skillful, and even the farmer follows his plow with 
greater alacrity and attention. * * * The good policy of 
the magistrate consists only in keeping it, if possible, still 
increasing; because by that means he keeps alive a spirit 
of industry in the nation and increases the stock of labor, 
in which consists all real power and riches.” 
William H. Crawford, Secretary of the Treasury, in a 
report to Congress, dated February 12, 1820, says : “ All in¬ 
telligent writers on currency agree that when it is de¬ 
creasing In amount poverty and misery must prevail.” 
A multitude of other eminent authorities could be readily 
cited to prove that while a decrease in the amount of 
money in circulation and consequent falling prices are not 
only oppressive to debtors, but cause stagnation in trade, 
reduced production and enforced idleness; by an increase 
in the amount of money in circulation production is 
stimulated by the profits resulting from advancing prices ; 
labor is consequently in deinand and better paid, and the 
general activity and buoyancy insure to capital a wider 
demand and higher remuneration. 
Gresham’s law might have been operative in Elizabethan 
days, but experience has since shown that various condi¬ 
tions Interfere with its operation. Moreover, that law 
referred only to one kind of metal, as pointed out by Jovens 
in Money and Mechanism of Exchange, and not to the 
influence of one metal in driving another out of circulation. 
Isn’t it a bold assertion that “ none doubts that free 
coinage for us, at the present ratio, would speedily give us 
monometallism,” etc., in face of the fact that probably a 
majority of the voting population of the country, advocate 
the free coinage of silver without any fear of such a 
result ? 
Was the hardship endured by borrowers of depreciated 
currency rendered any the less bitter and unjust because 
the government forced them to pay $1 with Interest for 
every 50 cents they had received f We hear a great deal 
about the atrocious injustice of the government if it 
should compel creditors to recover a cent less than the 
amount they lent; while the injustice of forcing the 
debtors to pay two dollars for every one they borrowed, 
is lightly slurred over, as in the above sentence. Is not 
this another instanceof Shylockand his “ pound of flesh ?” 
What honest, disinterested man doubts that the equity 
of time contracts was disturbed by the action of the gov¬ 
ernment in causing such a violent appreciation in money 
value ? 
As to the steady appreciation of gold, Tooke and New- 
march, recognized authorities, hold that between 1810 
and 1849 gold had increased in value 145 per cent, 
which is equivalent to a fall of 59 per cent in prices. A 
comparison of the average of prices of various products— 
manufactured and agricultural—at intervals of 20 years 
will show a similar result. Among those who make a 
special study of such subjects no doubt with regard to 
the matter exists. In 1879 Lord Beaconsfleld said: “ Gold 
is every day appreciating in value, and as it appreciates 
the lower become prices.” 
John Stuart Mill (Political Economy) says: “The 
value of money, other things being the same, varies in¬ 
versely as its quantity ; every increase of quantity lower¬ 
ing the value, and every diminution raising it in a ratio 
exactly equivalent.” 
Ricardo (reply to Bosanquet) says : “ The value of money 
In any country is determined by the amount existing. 
* * * That commodities would rise or fall in proportion 
to the increase or diminution of money, I assume as a fact 
that Is incontrovertible ” * * * 
Other statesmen and political economists also recognize 
the fact. Silver having been demonetized of late in so 
many countries, the volume of money has greatly de¬ 
creased, and the value of gold proportionately increased. 
Who does not know that the price of labor is not regu¬ 
lated nowadays by the relation of supply and demand ? 
If It were so regulated our correspondent’s argument 
would doubtless have much force; but the price of labor 
in these times is a thoroughly artificial thing in all civil¬ 
ized countries. It is a matter regulated mainly by organ¬ 
ization among the operatives, and the more perfect and 
widespread the organization the higher the wages. This 
is clearly shown by the wide difference between the wages 
of the same class of operatives not only in different coun¬ 
tries, but in different towns in the same country. The price 
of labor being therefore an artificial matter, no just con¬ 
clusion can be drawn from it as to the appreciation or de¬ 
preciation of gold. 
With regard to the “cant” phrase “barbarian circulat¬ 
ing medium,” 63 years ago silver was a “ circulating med¬ 
ium” on a parity with gold in Great Britian; 18 years ago 
it was the same in the United States, less than 25 years ago 
it was the same in all the other commercial nations of the 
world; are any of these less barbarous to-day than 
they were then ? For over 3,000 years both metals were con¬ 
currently the specie “circulating medium” of the world; was 
the world In all that time barbarian f Are the above-men¬ 
tioned countries in which it is the only metallic standard of 
value to-day, barbarian? Even to-day in this country silver, 
not gold, is the great specie “ circulating medium.” Which 
of the readers of this article doesn’t handle 10, yes 50 pieces 
of silver for one of gold ? Is not the same the case in Eng- 
