The full text on this page is automatically extracted from the file linked above and may contain errors and inconsistencies.
SILVER COINAGE.
FR E E CO IN AG E OF SIL V E R
IS
Bobbing the Wage Worker, Oppressing the Farmer.
Errors in Finance cost $40,000,000.
REMARKS
OF
H O N J. H. W A L K E R ,
OF MASSACHUSETTS,
IN THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
JUNE
6,
1890.
W A S H I N G T O N *
1890.
REMARKS
OP
HON.
JOSEPH
H. W A L K E R .
The House having under consideration the bill (H. It. 5381) authorizing the
issue o f Treasury notes on deposits o f silver bullion—
Mr. WALKER, o f Massachusetts, said:
Mr. Sp e a k e k : I propose this morning to make a plain, business-like
statement upon the question of the silver coinage of this country. I
have no set speech to make, in the ordinary definition o f “ a speech, *1
as it is understood on this floor.
The reasons for free coinage that are given are, first, that there is
widespread depression because of low prices. Now, I want to say
that there is not a word of truth in the statement of there being any
depression of business. In fact, there is not a solitary word of truth
in any statements made or reasons given for free coinage, and there is
not a single fact that justifies a statement that is made in favor of free
coinage, not one. Let me say that I do not object to being questioned
as I go on. I will give you a fair opportunity if you want to ask ques
tions for information or if you choose to contest my statements as to
facts as they are made.
The dropping of silver out of our coinage system in 1873 was with
the full knowledge and approval of nearly every man in the country
who at that time took any interest in coinage or monetary questions
or whose experience qualified him to have an intelligent opinion upon
such questions.
We are so old-fashioned as to think that farmers know most of farm
ing, tanners of making leather, blacksmiths of working iron, ministers
of preaching, doctors of medicine, teachers of teaching, and that bankers,
like George Peabody, George W. Riggs, W. W. Corcoran, and thousands
like them now living all over this country and Europe, know as much,
and possibly more, o f the probable outcome of any given financial con
dition, or of any proposed monetary policy, or of any particular finan
cial measure or law, as men equally able, charitable, patriotic, and
honest who have given all their lives to other things. In fact, we in
wardly smile at the assurance and pride of opinion of those men who are
“ wiser in their own conceit than seven men that can render a reason. ”
The advocates of free coinage say, Mr. Speaker, that the farmers are
not prosperous; that there is distress prevailing among them; and we
have had several men on this floor who have enjoyed very much the
“ burning of corn” in their speeches. In fact, this has been quite an
occupation on the floor o f the House during this session, when, as a mat
ter of fact, there has never been a day since the sun shone on this earth
when the farmer could pay off a debt or buy a farm with so few days’
labor as he can to-day. Further than that, they say that demoneti
4
zation of silver is the cause of this prevailing distress (that does not
exist) and of low prices. I want to show that prices have been going
down for the last hundred years—more rapidly in the last fifty than in
the preceding fifty because of improved methods and machinery, and
more rapidly during the last ten or fifteen years than ever before, and
that the demonetization of silver has not had the slightest perceptible
or provable effect on the depression of prices, which I think I will make
clear.
I desire to call your attention to one other fact.
Not a single witness came before the Committee on Coinage but ad
mitted that “ all trade was the exchange of product for product. ’ ’ A
man wants money for what it will buy, not for the money itself. You
borrow a thousand dollars and you are rid of it in an hour; and yet
you have exactly what you borrowed it for and what you wanted when
you borrowed it; that is to say, you borrowed capital, and not money;
and the money goes out of your hands in five minutes, and the next
man takes it and uses it; and what you borrow, I repeat, is capital,
and not money. The whole discussion starts on a misapprehension o f
what money is.
I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that more money means more misery.
[Laughter and applause.]
Mr, ROGERS. I will take a little of the misery.
Mr. DUNNELL. That kind of misery we all like.
Mr. PERKINS. We would all be willing, I think, to stand a little
of it. [Laughter.]
Mr. PICKLER. Let us suffer. [Laughter and applause.]
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I want to say to you that money
in a proper form and of standard value can only be used to a limited
amount. It is true of this as of everything else, that “ a sufficiency is
enough;” and when you go beyond that amount you can not profita
bly use the surplus money any more than you can use anything else
that is pore than a sufficiency. The money, therefore, that is suffi
cient t<J perform the business or exchanges of the country is all that is
necessary or that can be used. You might illustrate this by taking
the case of a railroad. You can not use a railroad profitably beyond
the necessities of the traffic on the road. When you furnish the facil
ities for transporting all that is brought to the road for transportation,
all that you furnish beyond that is surplus, and is useless, and is
owned at a loss; and, as far as money is concerned, you can not use
a dollar beyond what is necessary to make the exchanges o f commerce.
That is all there is about it. When you get beyond that, money
makes more misery by inflating the prices of everything the poor man
buys. How was it in regard to the assignats in France ? Wages did
not go up. They issued money, and more money, and then still more
money, until the workingmen in France were in abj ect poverty, with mobs
taking everything they could lay hands on to buy bread. So with
us was money cheapened during the first part of our inflation.
In 1864 there was a man in my employ who employed three other
men, doing the work in an adjoining town, and on one occasion when
I paid him for his work half as much again as I had ever, paid him be
fore, he took his money in his hands, sat down in my office, and said,
“ I will not take out any more work; I can not buy the support of my
family and the men in my employ for the coming week with the money
I haver in my hand. I will go home and go to scratching the ground ta
get enough to keep me from starvation until this war ends. I am not
W ALKER
5
physically able to go into the war. I will go to work for you again
when the war is over. ’ ’ I said to him, ‘ ‘ How much advance in pay do
you w an t?” He thought that one-third more than he had been re
ceiving would be enough. I looked the matter over with him and I
said “ You are right,” and gave it to him.
I remember an old gentleman sitting in my office in 1865 with the
tears running down his face. He had sold his farm in 1859, had come
into the city, bought a little house, and loaned out the residue of
his, money at 6 per cent., yielding him just enough to support his
wife and himself. And when money was depreciated to one-third its
previous value he said, ‘ ‘ I have not had a new suit o f elothes or bought
anything but food for a year. I ha?e not been able to keep warm and
get enough to eat. I have held every office in my town; I will not ac
cept charity; I w ill not beg; I will die first.” He was a good Demo
crat; he voted the Democratic ticket all through the war, and cursed
the Greenbackers and the Republicans. But he told the truth just the
same. I will not say he was an exceptional Democrat, because I do
not think he was wholly so.
There are three things that can be honestly done to assist a man in
debt: First, by giving him money to pay tfye debt or the obligation;
second, by lessening the interest on the debt and thus enabling him
to use the savings in interest to pay the principal; third, by increas
ing his receipts for each day’s work in increased products for each day’s
work done on the farm or in the shop by better methods or improved
machinery, or by increasing his daily pay. Each comes to the same
result. Each is honest, but the last two increase the manhood of the
beneficiary, while the first saps his honor.
Again, the farmer’s case is that of the competitor o f intelligent
barbarism with the conditions of Christian civilization. It is very
nearly the condition of the American mechanic in competition with
the Chinaman. I f a graduate of Harvard College adopts the style
of living of the celibate barbarian to produce cheap, as against the man
in Ohio with a wife and children, good farm buildings, churches, and
schools to support, with all the modem luxuries to provide for his family,
he will beat out and starve the Ohioan, who is at the expense o f lead
ing a civilized and Christian life. He has all the advantages o f a high
Christian culture and intelligence in production and the economy of the
barbarian in expenditure. Still worse for the Christian if this barIbarian uses the land of the Christian to beat him out in the economic
race. The public lands are the common property of all until utilized
as homesteads. Every animal grown on the public domain, or partly
grown there, ought to be taxed $4 if sent to the market over one year
and under two years old, and $8 if over two years and under three
years old, and $12 if over three years old, in the interest of the farmer
who is also stock-raiser, or should be, and in the interest of the public
Treasury, and to break up the beef trust.
I want to call attention to another thing. The payments to the
wage-workers o f this country are $4,000,000,000 a year. Do you
question it ? Then get right up and say so. I am ready for questions;
that is what I am here for; I am not here for the purpose of making a
speech. There are 20,000,000 wage-workers; and if they average1$200
a year (and that is a pretty low figure), it makes $4,000,000,000 a year
for wages.
I want to say the mortgages in this country are not $2,500,000000, while the whole valuation is but $24,000,000,000. I base these
W ALKER
6
figures upon the last census. I have added something to them; they
are not exactly as they will be found in the books, but they represent
substantially the facts as existing at present. ’ Twenty-four billion dol
lars is the valuation of this country. As I have said, the mortgages are
not $2,500,0u0,000; and the amount paid off annually does not exceed
$500,000,000. The annual payments on the private debts of this
country are not one-eighth of what is paid as wages.
You talk about getting out of debt. You propose to rob the poor in
order to get out o f debt. The whole debt of this country is but little
more than what the annual wage payment is. Yet you talk about get
ting out of debt by actually robbing the workingmen of this country,
by reducing their pay, by increasing the cost of the absolute necessaries
they buy and reducing the value of the money they get.
Let me say just a word to these gentlemen who come here with
this immense lot of statistics to pile up. In the first place, they
do not know how to use them; nor do I know how to use any such mass
o f statistics; and they are of no earthly use to anyone. To undertake
to deduce anything from statistics in that form is just about as sensi
ble as it would be if when you want to know the physical organism
or the chemical composition of a particular kind of wood, instead ot
taking a little piece and grinding it up into fiber to know its fiber, and
analyzing it in a retort for its chemical properties, you should get 400,000,000,000 cords of wood and pile them up ten miles away and stand off
that distance and look at the pile through a spy-glass. That would be
just as sensible as to undertake to talk here upon the mass of statistics
you bring in. The only way to settle economic questions is to take
the individual man, stand him up and look at him; see how the thing
operates on him; and if it operates on him favorably it will operate on
every other man favorably; and if unfavorably, it will operate on all
others unfavorably. What I propose to do is to stand up the individ
ual man.
Again, money has no place in economics. We never talk about
money in economics; it is the exchange of the products of labor, and
money is an incident. You might destroy all the gold and silver in
this country to-night, and waking up to-morrow moaning you would
not be hurt one iota; our business would go on just the same. For
fifteen years we did not have gold or silver in this country as money.
Now, do not misunderstand me in this statement. I say “ if gold
and silver were destroyed past all redemption the world over ” it would
make no difference; I do not mean if gold and silver were demonetized
and greenbacks put in their place, for that is just as different a thing
as black is from white. I am talking about the destruction of coin out
o f the world. There is not a man here who does not know that if
all the coin were actually destroyed we would never know the differ
ence; we would go right along as now.
Why not discuss this question on a proper basis ? What is the use
of getting up here and talking to the prejudices of our constituents a
thousand or five thousand miles away. I think such things are a dis
grace to this House. I have been made physically sick, absolutely
sleepless, hearing the nonsense that is talked here. [Laughter. ] And
I have done some o f this talking to constituents myself. [Renewed
laughter. ] It is the fashion, but never mind, it is not creditable.
We have this immense amount of silver; you do not want to discredit
silver! We might tHink silver was some blushing maiden of sixteen
and somebody proposed to kiss her against her will.
WALKER
7
Talk about discrediting silver. How can you discredit a thing that
is physical? The question is whether it is desirable to use silver; and
let me say right here that there is not the slightest disagreement upon
the floor of this House about the use of silver for money. There are a
great many men who do not think there is any room for it, that it is
not good economy; by others it is held that no damage will come from
the proper use of silver; but the question is how will you use it ? If you
will use silver so that it will not change the standard of exchange in prod
ucts, that is all right. To talk about the intrinsic value of gold or silver
is intrinsic hum bug! Intrinsic value! It is an opinion; it is a notion;
it is a hallucination, anything you choose to call it; but the commer
cial value of gold and the commercial value o f silver are just as easily
determined as the commercial value of anything else. We are rui^ning
silver mines and gold mines because it is profitable to mine gold and
mine silver. It is for its commercial value, at its cost in the wages of
the men who work in the mines, just as we are raising wheat and corn.
The silver men in the country who do not approve the bill reported
by the committee are determined to use silver to depreciate the cur
rency. This is made clear beyond doubt or question by their persistent
declaration that prices are too low, that they are made low by the want
o f sufficient money, and by their admission that their object in secur
ing the free coinage of silver is to inflate prices. But most significant
and conclusive of all is the admission of Senator T e l l e r that ‘ 4the
putting less gold in the gold dollar would have the effect he was seek
ing, ’ ’ and he has occupied two days of the time of the Senate and six
teen pages of the C o n g r e s s io n a l R e c o r d to make plain his extreme
anxiety to inflate prices by the use of silver.
One of the most remarkable things in this discussion is that so acute a
man as Senator T e l l e r should give as a reason for silver not being more
largely coined with free coinage in this country previous to 1873 that our
laws required 2.4 per cent, more silver in our ratio to gold than European
coinage laws required, and that the market price of silver, because of
free coinage in Europe, being 2.4 per cent, higher in its gold price in
the European markets than in American markets, all of the American
silver went to Europe for coinage, and almost in the same breath says
that no silver, coined or uncoined, will now come from Europe to this
country if we open our mints to free coinage at a ratio of 28 per cent,
higher than its gold value in European markets; that is to say, for
forty years European merchants took our silver to Europe to be coined
at a profit of 2.4 per cent:, from 1837 to 1873, while our mints during
all that time were open to the free coinage of silver, and that now, in
the year of our Lord 1890, with every mint in Europe closed to the free
coinage of silver, European merchants will not transport silver from
Europe to this country, where they can have it freely coined at a profit
of 28 per cent.
More money, and that of less commercial value, and therefore less
purchasing power than that we now have, is whaithe silver men demand.
Raising prices o f commodities by increasing the quantity of money or
by making money cheap has the same effect as reducing wages. It
certainly means, if it means anything, that a day’s wages must not be
allowed to buy so much, and the laborer’s standard of living; must
thereby be reduced. Says Master Workman Powderly:
Every step in reducing the standard of living and .wages of the laborer re
duces the wages of the skilled workmen as well. W hen 75 cents a day in 1890
takes the place of $1 in 1889, each recipient o f such wages must curtail his pur
chases, in order to conform to the 25 per cent, reduction in wages. Less o f food,
W ALKER
8
less o f clothing, not so many shoes, and cheaper lodgings must be had, and those
who make shoes, clothing, and articles o f household use find that their busi
ness falls off also; the falling off in business is followed by a reduction in wages,
and the evil stream runs the entire length, until all are infected.
Says J. E. Thorold Rogers, in Work and Wages:
When prices o f the necessaries of life rise, wages do not rise with them. No
crime against labor is more injurious than expedients adopted on the part o f
Government which tend to raise prices.
There is not an economist in $ny country who does not declare that
his investigations confirm this statement of Mr. Rogers.
The experiment of depreciating the currency has been tried in every
country and never tried without reaching the same result, and never
tried in any country under circumstances more favorable to the wage
worker than here. A war was in progress during four years o f the
time, of such vast proportions that the consumption of the aggre
gate products of labor was increased by fully one-tenth, besides which
more than one-tenth of the men who competed with each other in the
labor market were employed in military operations, which was the
equivalent o f increasing the market for the laborer by one-fourth. Un
der these apparently favorable conditions for the wage-worker the value
of his wages to him ought to have materially increased, instead o f de
preciating, if it is possible for him ever to save himself from loss in pe
riods of a debased currency. If under such conditions he lost the value
o f two years’ wages in inflation, how can any one believe that the
small farmers and wage-workers will be benefited by the unlimited
coinage o f 412J grains o f silver into a legal-tender dollar, depreciating
the currency 25 per cent, and more?
Now, then, as to the depression of prices. The average price from
1856 to 1860 for wheat was 96.7 cents a bushel, and for the last five
years 72 cents. I have asked many men on this floor who “ are skilled
in the art” of farming and many outside this Hall with a view o f de
ciding as to the cost o f producing a bushel o f grain to-day as compared
with the cost of producing it in 1860. It is a fact that there was
some farming agricultural machinery used before 1860, but it was very
little, and it was not used to such an extent as to materially affect
prices. It is fair to compare the prices from 1855 to 1860 with the
prices from 1885 to 1889 upon the principle that it only costs half as
much per bushel to produce the agricultural products now that it did
up to 1860. I have inquired, as I said, and many put the cost now at
one-third of what it was then and some at a half; but a half is near the
correct statement. It certainly costs not over half what it did before
1860.
The value of the same things from 1856 to 1889 is as follows:
In Chicago.
Wheat.
Corn.
In New York.
Oats.
W ool.
Cotton.
1858.............................................
$1,553
1.227
.715
.650
. 69 L
$0.480
.410
.400
.490
.450
$0.28
.36
.29
.32
.26
$0,380
.500
.330
.520
.500
$0,103
.135
.122
.120
.108
Average..............................
.967
.444
.30
.444
.118
WALKER
9
In New York.
In Chicago.
Wheat.
Average.
Corn.
Oats.
Export
price of
wool.
Export
price o f
cotton.
$0.71
.72
.74
.70
.74
$0.43
.38
.36
.44
.36
$0.36
.33
.33
.33
.25
$0.33
.36
.38
.35
.38
$0.115
.099
.095
.098
.099
.72
.40
.32
.36
.101
Wheat is selling in Chicago at 90 cents to-day.
In the five years from 1856 to 1860, in Chicago, wheat averaged 96.7
cents, and in |he last five years the average was 72 cents. In the five
years from 1856 to 1860 the average price 6f corn was 44.4 cents, and
in the last five years 40 cents. Oats in the first five years were 30 cents
and are now 32 cents. Remember these are Chicago prices, found by
taking New York export prices and taking off the freights, and the
freights were then three or four times as high as they are now. Take
the freights off them—which I will publish in my speech that I do not
make according to custom, but that will be delivered to-morrow by
delivering the manuscript to the printer [laughter]—and it will show
that wool was 44.4 cents for the former period and 36 cents for the latter
period; it will show that cotton was then 11.8 and is now 10.1 cents.
We are told by Mr. T e l l e r , the great high-priest who ministers at
the altar of “ the temple of the greati goddess Diana,” where silver
smiths all over the silver States and in this Hall are calling out, “ Great
is Diana o f the Ephesians. Ye know that by this craft we have our
wealth,” “ because this our craft is in danger to be set at nought” —
they would make the people believe that the fall in prices is due to our
treatment of the silver question and is not due to overproduction. He
is the highest priest on the score o f his great ability and persistence;
there is no doubt about that. He is sharper than all the rest of them,
but not sharp enough to be consistent in any two columns of his speech.
[Laughter. ]
Let us look at the facts. In 1873 we raised 281,000,000 bushels ol
wheat; in 1889 we raided 490,000,000 bushels. Are agricultural prod
ucts an exception? I f you have too much leather, leather goes down.
It goes down because you have too much. I f you have too many woolen
goods the price goes down, and goes down because you make too many;
but on argricultural products, oh, no; x>h, no; that is not^o; that is not
so at all. That is not so, because if it were so they would not have
to remonetize silver to cure the evil.
W ALKER
,
,
Production of wheat corn and oats in 1873 and 1889 compared.
WALKER
Produce.
Bushels.
Wheat, 1873...............................................
1889...............................................
1873..............................................
281,254,700
490.560.000
932.274.000
2,112,892,000
270.340.000
751.515.000
Corn,
Oats,
1873...............................................
1889.............................................y
Total excess
o f product
o f 1889 over
the same
per capita
product of
that o f 1873.
New
York
export
prices.
50,733,672
6.7
88,600,743
74,842,000
7.7
40,751,263
22.4
1,180,618,000
1889...............................................
33.3
70,529,487 689,596,000
562,021
6.5
481,175,000
1,032,642 338,505,000
11,8
$0. 61
.47
and
Excess of crop Bush Whole
ground
of 1889 over els per grain
ex
that of 1873
(in
(in bushels). capita. ported
bushels).
209,305,300
Excess of the product of 1889 at the ratio of production per capita of that of 1873,1,102,943,000 bushels.
The total product of wheat, corn, and oats in 1873 was J,483,808,700 bushels.
P o D u la tio n in 1889, 63,540,000.
Population in 1873, 41,677,000.
Freight
from
Value in
Chicago Chicago.
to New
York.
SO. 27
.15
SO. 34
.32
11
In 1873 we raised 932,000,000 bushels of corn. In 1889 we raise 2,112, 000,000 bushels. What do you think of that for increase? In 1873
we raised 270,000,000 bushels of oats. In 1889 we raise 751,000,000
bushels.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. Will the gentleman yield to me for a
question ?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I can not yield to be questioned
on the accuracy of statistics, but only on my own statements.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. I simply desire to ask you a question.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Come right over here, where I
can hear you.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. Just be still, and you can hear me.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Ask your question.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. In 1880 the product of the crop of
wheat-----Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I object to being interrupted in
that way.
A M e m b e r . But you invited inquiry.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. No, sir; not about other men’s
statements.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. If he can not answer a question I
will sit down.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I am not going to be questioned
about any other man’s statement that I quote here, nor am I going to
permit interjection of remarks into my speech. I am talking about
1873, when it is alleged silver was demonetized, and I am not going to
be talked down either. I am making a business statement, and I do
not propose to be talked down in these statements.
Mr. WILLIAMS, o f Illinois (continuing his interruptions while Mr.
W a l k e r , of Massachusetts, was speaking). Our wheat crop in 1880
was 498,000,000 bushels; in 1889 it was 490,000,000, yet the price of
wheat in 1889 was much less per bushel than in 1880. Was that
caused by overproduction ?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Illinois will be in order. Two
gentlemen can not occupy the floor at one time.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I am talking about 1873, and the
silver men must keep to the standard th*»y set up, Mr. Speaker, and I
want to compare wheat then with the surplus crop o f wheat in 1889
over and above the same ratio per capita, the overproduction.
The surplus crop in 1889, taking the same ratio that we had in 1873
and multiplying the inhabitants of to-day, 65,540,000, by the average
crop of 1873, 6.7 bushels, you find the surplus of wheat to-day as 74,842,000 bushels. Take the surplus of corn and it is 689,000,000. The
surplus of oats is 338,000,000 bushels. And, Mr. Speaker, it comes to
this, that the surplus product in 1889 as compared with 1883 is 1,103,000,000 bushels; that is to say, it is three-quarters of the whole crop of
1873. No surplus ! I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that there is not an
other business in the country that could have as much overproduc
tion as the farmers have had in the last three years and have its goods
bring anything at all. You could have them as a gift. I mean what
I say. I mean to say that they would go out of style; the moths would
eat them, and you could get them for the taking. There is no doubt
about it. I make that proposition as a business man, and if there is a
business man on this floor who disputes it, I would like to see him
stand up.
Mr. LIND. I dispute it.
WALKER
12
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. You are not a business m an • you
are a lawyer. [Laughter. ] Why, there are three hundred other law
yers on this floor who will dispute it, and who will swear that they are
right, and “ prove” that I am wrong from such facts as they will
state. [Laughter.]
Mr. LIND. I will do it.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Well, I guess I will not yield to
you, as you do not come under my definition o f a “ business man.’ ’
No one pretends, Mr. Speaker, that the crop of 1873 was not ample for
all the demands of this country. There was no cry of “ short crop ”
that year. In fact, the percentage of the crop of 1873 that was shipped
abroad was nearly one-third larger in proportion than the surplus of
the crop of 1889 that was shipped abroad.
Do you take that in, gentlemen ? [Laughter. ] Do you get it into your
minds ? [Laughter. ] Talk about a short crop in 1873 ! I repeat that
the proportion of the crop of 1873 that we shipped abroad was 3*2 per
cent., or nearly one-third, larger in proportion than the percentage o f
the crop of 1889 that was shipped abroad. I am proving to you that
there is not one word of truth in what you say on this subject of no
overproduction. [Laughter.] Not that you lie. I have no doubt
that you believe what you say, because I find that men have a great
facility for believing what they want to believe, and I do not claim to
be an entire exception to that rule myself. [Laughter. ] Oh, no; I
am not setting myself up here as an exceptional man; not at all.
[Laughter.]
Now, Mr. Speaker, I repeat again that the proportion of the crop o f
1873 exported was nearly one-third larger than the proportion of the crop
of 1889 that was shipped abroad, and yet Senator T e l l e r can stand u p
in the Senate, in the face of such facts, and says:
I believe the present fall in prices in this country which has been continu
ous, as we all know, since 1873, is to be largely attributed to our treatment of
the silver question. I am free to say it is not caused by overproduction.
“ Free to say ” is good. [Laughter.] They are all “ free to say ”
the same thing. My friend from Minnesota [Mr. L i n d ] over here is
“ free to say ” the same thing, and he has just said it freely for half
an hour. [Laughter.] He has spent half an hour undertaking to
prove that what I am now saying is not correct. Of course he £‘proved’ ’
it. [Laughter.] As I said before there are three hundred men here
who can stand up and ‘ 4prove ’ ’ that everything I say is all wrong.
Now, the total number of bushels of grain produced in the average
year of 1873 was 35| per capita, while in 1889 it was 52£ bushels per
capita. We raised, absolutely and relatively, every bushel of grain
that we could use or find a market for in 1873, and yet Senator T e l l e r
says “ there is no surplus that influences prices” in 1889 ! W ill the
Senator tell us how large a crop per capita would depreciate prices?
Or what is to be done with the 17 J- bushels produced in 1889 over 1873
per capita and in excess of any reasonable or possible demand ? The ex
cess in production o f 1889, taking the per capita of the crop o f 1873 for
the standard in calculation, was 74 per cent., or three-fourths as many
bushels more than the demands of the country, as the aggregate crop of
1873.
Now, my friend over here [Mr. L i n d ] , the lawyer who wants to
answer for a business man [laughter], has told us that the prices o f
commodities do not favor the farmers; that they have hard times out
in his country, and that merchants have to keep their goods over a
year, so that when people buy them they have to buy goods that are
WALKER
13
moth-eaten and shop-worn. Mr. Speaker, I have been selling goods
all over this country, from Maine to California, for about forty years,
and I have always found that where the dealers keep their goods until
they are shop-worn I do not get my pay. [Laughter.] But our col
lections have been about as good for the last five years as they ever were,
and the statistics which I will lay before the House will show that the
country has never prospered as it has prospered during the last five years.
At the same time I want to say, Mr. Speaker, that those of us who have
been in business have not made money during the last five years.
Goods have been going down every year since 1873 about 10 per (Sent, a
year. I do not mean 10 per cent, on the prices of 1873, but 10 per
cent, each year on the price of the preceding year, so that we are sell
ing, in the case of leather, now for 60 cents a pound that we sold in
1873 for $1.35.
Furthermore, the man who takes up land and lives in a hut of one
or two rooms made of a few boards, cultivating a thousand acres of land,
is a fearful competitor of an Ohio farmer with the civilized conditions
of a century to support. These things work great hardships to all
farmers, but especially to those o f the older States, and more especially
in New England. By the freight rates I have given (Appendix FF) it
will be seen that New England farmers on their small, rocky hillside
farms had an advantage in freight charges from Chicago of 30 cents a
bushel on wheat, 28 cents on corn, and 16 cents on oats in 1859, which
have been gradually reduced to summer charges by water of 8|- cents
on wheat, 7^ cents on corn, and 5J cents on oats in 1890, to the great
loss of the New England farmer, but to the great gain of the masses of
the people of New England. This thing explains the farmer’s situa
tion to-day in comparison with what he thinks it ought to be.
One thing is sure, namely, that with railroads reaching everywhere,
low freights and the sharp competition of semi-barbarous conditions in
some Territories here and the barbarian at 10 or 15 cents a day in Asia,
using our improved machinery and with our much higher wages to our
laborers, producing staple crops, farming lands here will be lower for a
great many years before they will be any higher than how, and every
pains should be taken to bring consumers in close proximity to the
farmer that the farmer may introduce more varied crops and supply
neighboring markets.
After all I have said, I know from the closest observation and study
of the records that the American farmer is the most independent, pros
perous, and happy class there is on the face of the earth. And, fur
thermore, I believe that his prosperity in the near future will far excel
any he has ever known before. There never has been a day when he
could buy any given farm or pay off any mortgage for as few days’ work
as to-day, and the price of his crops he so cheaply raises will soon reach
the prices they have averaged for fifty years. The farmer’s product in
any given decade always fixes rates upon which all products are ex
changed, and the present is and the future will be no exception.
The farmer can take his hides anywhere to-day and exchange them for
leather and get more good leather than he ever could in his life. Now,
as I am a little hoarse, I would really be glad if the gentleman from
Mississippi [Mr. A l l e n ] , who takes so much delight in “ burning
corn,” would burn a little corn.
Mr. ALLEN, of Mississippi. We might burn a little leather.
[Laughter. ]
Mr, WALKER, of Massachusetts. Yes; the odor of a little leather,
if you are out o f corn, might relieve my throat.
W ALKER
14
Now, take twenty-three of the absolute necessaries o f life, things
entering into the consumption of farmer and mechanic alike, and I in
vite attention to the comparison of prices at different periods, in a table
which I shall publish with this speech. You will find the articles the
price of which makes the aggregates in the following table:
APPE N D IX AA.
Variation in price in thirty-five years, covering the period of inflation, of
twenty-three articles of prime necessity {New York export price).
23 articles, family supplies, average cost from (Appendix A A )—
1855 to 1859.................................................................................................... $168.74
1860 to 1864..................................................................................................... 179.75
1864 to 1868..................................................................................................... 261.63
1865 to 1869..................................................................................................... 256.37
1870 to 1874............................................... ..................................................... 183.13
1875 to 1879.................................................................................................... 154.33
1880 to 1889..................................................................................................... 137.32
Everything has been going down except man, and he has been ap
preciating. Wages have been going up steadily, and what a man buys
has been going down.
From 1860 to 1864 prices were 6 per cent, higher than they averaged
from 1855 to 1859 because of inflation the last two years.
The average increase of commodities in the next five year's, from 1865
to 1869, was 43 per cent, over the previous five years.
In the next five years, from 1870 to 1874, prices fell off from the pre
vious five years 28 per cent.
In 1875 to 1879 they fell off 16 per cent, from the previous five years;
and in the next ten years, from 1880 to 1889, they fell off 10.6 per cent.
And the prices for the twenty-three prime necessaries of life for the ten
years, from 1880 to 1889, of ‘ ‘ good money, ’ ’ and precisely the same qual
ity of money used in every Christian country are 18 per cent, less than
thirty years ago, from 1850 to 1859.
The fall of the price of products and the increase of wages has been
continuous and steady, with scarcely any check, except in this country
during paper-money inflation, for nearly a century, the tall of the price
of products and the increase in the price of wages being more rapid
in the last three or four decades than ever before.
Dividing the cost of the prime necessaries required by a farmer’s fam
ily o f four persons by the price o f each cereal in Chicago that year will
show beyond dispute the economic value to the farmer of each bushel of
his grain delivered in Chicago.
It will be seen by Table AA that the—
WALKER
P ric e p e r
bushel.
Supplies cost
in bushels.
$152.67
301.23
200.03
182.53
125.28
125.28
Supplies cost
in bushels.
1860 .........................................
1865 ..........................................
1870 ..........................................
1873 ..........................................
1889 ..........................................
1890 ... .......................
P rice p e r
bushel.
Supplies.
Oats.
Supplies cost
in bushels.
Cost o f prime necessary
things was in—
Corn.
P rice p e r
bushel.
Wheat.
$0.69
1.50
1.00
1.02
.73
.90
221
200
200
178
171
139
$0.45
.88
.66
.34
.32
339
341
303
536
391
$0.26
.49
.45
.24
.24
587
615
414
764
520
15
C LO TH IN G .
Cost o f precisely the same style, quality, and weight of an ordinary suit of
heami woolen- clothes in grain, Chicago value.
22.7 SO. 49
44.1
.24
31.2
.24
48.1
62.5
41.6
Cost of suit
in bushels.
Price p e r
bushel.
13.3 $0.88
.34
14.7
.32
13.7
Oats.
Cost of suit
in bushels.
$20.00 81.50
15.00 1.02
.73
10.00
Corn.
Price p e r
bushel.
1
1865.................................................
1873............................... .................
1889.................................................
Cost of suit
in bushels.
Price of
suit.
Year.
Price p e r
bushel.
Wheat.
overcoats.
Oats.
Cost of coat
in bushels.
12.6 $0.88
.34
11.7
12.3
.32
Cost of coat
in bushels.
Price p e r
bushel.
Corn.
Price p e r
bushel.
$19.00 $1.50
14.00 1.02
9.00
.73
Cost of coat
in bushels.
Price o f
coat.
Year.
Price p e r
bushel.
Wheat.
27.6 $0.49
.24
41.1
28.1
.24
38.7
58.3
28.1
LEATHER.
jPnce of farmers' green hides and how much leather each would buy.
Year.
Price o f Pounds o f Price o f 50- Price of
Price o f 11- the
Feet of
leather
the leather leather
pound
pound
the
the
per pound leather
per foot green skin
green
green
skin
green
made
made
calf-skin.
will buy. cow hide.
will buy.
from it.
from it.
1872.......
1873.......
1874......
1875
1876 ,
1877.......
187S.......
1879
1880,
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
1886,
.
1887
1888
1889
1890
$2.00
1.98
1.8L
1.76
1.45
1.45
1.37
1.26
1.65
1.70
1.59
1.54
1.54
1.43
1.37
1.10
.93
.77
.82
WALKER
$1.37
1.35
1.30
1.30
1.00
1.00
.90
.80
1.00
.95
.95
.90
.90
.90
.80
.75
.70
. 65
.60
1.5
1.4
1.4
1.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.6
1.8
1.6
1.7
1.7
1.6
1.7
1.4
l.£
1.2
1.4
$6.00
6.25
5.25
5.25
5.50
4.18
5.00
3.75
4.75
4.87
4.75
4.62
4.50
4.50
4.37
4.37
3.75
3.12
3.25
$0.24
.24
.23
.205
.17
.18
.15
.15
.195
.19
.18
.165
.17
.175
.145
.105
.105
.11
.10
25
26
23
25
32
23
33
24
24
25
26
28
26
31
30
41
35
28
32
16
That is to say, you can buy these articles of prime necessity to-day
for thirty-nine bushels of wheat less than you had to pay for the same
articles in 1873.
Mr. WILLIAMS, of Illinois. Can a thousand-dollar mortgage be
paid off with the same amount of wheat to-day that would have been
required five years ago?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I am coming to that presently;
and upon that point I think I will satisfy you and a little more than
satisfy you, if my time does not give out.
Now let us turn to the cost of tools (Appendix BB).
Two-horse corn cultivator:
1873.....................................
1889 ....................................
Two-horse m owing m ach in e:
1873 ....................................
1889.....................................
Two-horse steel p lo w :
1873 ....................................
1889.....................................
m $1.02
15
.73
27.4 $0.34
.32
20.5
Cost of tool
in bushels.
Oats.
Price per
bushel.
Cost of tool
in bushels.
Corn.
P rice per
bushel.
Price.
Cost of tool
in bushels.
Tools.
Price per
bushel.
Wheat.
82.2 »0.24
46.8
.24
116.6
62.5
90
50
1.02
.73
88.2
68.5
.34
.32
264.7
156.2
.24
.24
375.0
208.0
20
12
1.02
.73
19.7
16.4
.34
.32
58.8
37.5
.24
.24
83.3
50.0
Mr. Speaker, I wish again to call your attention to the issue. This
is not a contest in regard to silver as silver. It is a contest upon the
question whether the poor man shall be robbed by depreciating the
currency in order to increase the wealth o f the rich. And I want to
say that any man (I do not care what his constituents think to-day)
who advocates the free coinage of gilver and the putting of our mone
tary affairs on the silver basis of a 72-cent dollar, which is what the
proposition for free coinage means and its only meaning, for it will not
raise prices unless it does depreciate, that is a sure thing— the man or
the party who does that will be sunk in eternal injjfrny. Such things
may be done in time of war, when the life of the nation is threatened,
and the people will forgive you. But I do not care what the special
demands o f the people are; they ask a ce/tain result; they expect us
to give them a certain beneficent result; they have sent us here on the
supposition that we are competent to investigate these questions and to
come to a wise conclusion. They have sent us here, furthermore, to
stand between them and what they shall demand if they are mistaken
and if their demand ought not to be granted.
Mr. PAYSON. W ill it interrupt the gentleman-----Mr. WALKER, o f Massachusetts. Not a bit.
’ Mr. PAYSON. I am listening to the gentleman with attention-----Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I am very glad you are. I heard
your speech the other night in caucus, and I am glad you are here.
[Laughter.]
Mr. PAYSON. I am glad to be herp.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I remember the remark, “ My
WALKER
17
constituents will not send me back unless we have free silver. ’ ’ [Laugh
ter.]
Mr. PAYSON. I wish to ask the gentleman a question in good faith.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I will answer it in perlect good
faith.
Mr. PAYSON. I was going to ask the gentleman to state-----Mr. ROGERS. I raise the point of order that the proceedings of the
caucus are not to be spread before the House. [Laughter.]
The SPEAKER. The Chair overrules the point of order. [Laugh
ter.]
Mr. PAYSON. I want to ask the gentleman in perfect good faith
(my time will come a little later as to anything personal that he may
say) whether he thinks there is anything in the financial situation of
this country that needs legislation, and, if ,so, what that legislation
ought to be. 1 should be glad to have him answer this question in a
general way.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Well, if the House will let me
get through— I am afraid my hour is going pretty rapidly—Mr. Speaker,
how long have I talked?
The SPEAKER. The gentleman has spoken thirty-seven minutes.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I thought it was about fifteen.
{Laughter.]
Mr. PAYSON. If the gentleman from Massachusetts in a general
way some time during the progress of his remarks—I will not dignify
it by calling it a speech—will answer that I shall be glad.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I do not call it a speech myself.
I only want to call it a “ business talk,” for I do not mean to do any
thing to discredit myself. I do not mean to call it a speech, because
I do not want to put it in comparison with the talk of other gentle
men. [Laughter.]
Mr. PAYSON. Well, if the gentleman will be good enough to answer
that before he closes-----Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I will.
Mr. PAYSON. I say if the gentleman will in good faith answer
that or give a definition of it to enlighten the House on his position,
for there are those of us here who want this to be sonou thing other than
a mere circus. [Laughter.]
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Well, I hope nobody will desig
nate it a circus or will come around snapping a whip trying to make
it appear like one. [Laughter and applause.]
Mr. Speaker, I want to call the attention of this House to another
thing, and let me tell you that I know what I am talking about.
[Laughter. ] I spent a great deal of time in carefully studying up this
whole question for the purpose of getting at the real facts, and they
will appear in the speech like the other fellows [laughter] and some
of them will appear here. What I am giving you now I can prove
to the fullest satisfaction, if anybody questions it, if I can get access to
my documents in support of them. Here is a table which may be in
teresting to you in this connection:
In n. woolen mill, as follows:
Plain weavers lost 1 year and 297 working days’ wages.
Fancy weavers lost 1 year and 114 working days’ wages.
Spinners lost 1 year and 70 working days’ wages.
Dyers lost 189.4 working days’ wages.
Giggers lost 171 working days’ wages.
Shearers lost 113 working days’ wages.
W A L K E R --------2
18
Locomotive engineers lost 1 year and 245 working days' wages.
Locomotive firemen lost 1 year and 168 working days’ wages.
Green shavers and whiteners lost 1 year and 116 working days’ wages.
Machinists lost 1 year and 105 working days* wages.
Blacksmiths lost 1 year and 86 working days’ wages.
Carpenters lost 260 working days’ wages.
Finishers lost 210 working days’ wages.
Beam and vard men lost 114 working days* wages.
Plain weavers during this period of inflation lost in labor 1 year
and 297 days’ working wages, reckoning at the same prices they re
ceived before inflation began.
Mr. Speaker, let me say that the farm laborers have the hardest time of
any laborers the world over, those I mean who worked for wages; not
the farmers themselves, but the farm laborers; they lost during that
period the wage values of somewhere from three to five years, I can
not give the figures exactly, because it is impossible to obtain them in
an exact or authentic form, but somewhere between three and five years,
and that the wage-workers in this country lost from three-quarters of a
billion to two and one-quarter billions of money in that time.
Now, if they lost that money, where did it go to ? Who got it? I
got some ; every business man got a share of it; every trader got his
share; every stock-jobber got a share, and every man between the pro
ducer and consumer, in larger profits and what he took for insurance
for increased risks, and we lost it in depreciation of our stocks in get
ting down from inflation prices to present prices and most of us failed
in the process. From 1850 to 1860 I can give the names of twenty
men that were in my employment that bought land, built houses, and
paid for them, and not a man that I can now recall did the same thing
irom 1860 to 1870.
Chicago p r ic e , five
yeais before 1860.......
Cost:
•
Half in day’s work
in 1889...................
Add 20 oercent. for
use of tools...........
48.4
22.2
15
9.6
4.4
3
58
73
Increased weight of
gold a farmer re
ceives for a day’s
work in 1889..pcr cent..
26
Increased value of a
day’s work in buy
ing tools and sup
plies............ per cent...
63.6
Bushels re
quired.
Price of
oatp.
as.
as.
44.4
96.7
Selling price in 1889.... 125.28
30
265
26.6
578
18
854
171
32
391
24
522
20
33
*261
47.6
55
*55.4
♦Average.
Bushels re
quired.
as.
Economic cost in day’s
work as compared
with 1860 conditions... $153.77
W ALKER
Price of
corn.
Bushels re
quired.
Price of
wheat.
See appendix AA.
Cost of sup
plies.
Table showing proportionate cost of products in day's work.
19
This showing makes it clear that a farmer can buy in wheat a(farm in
as many less days’ work in 1890 as he could in 1860 as 73 is to 58, or
26 per cent., more than one-quarter less time.
The extreme depression in corn from the extreme overproduction
does not make even corn on the average of five years up to 1889 against
him. He saves as 32 is to 26.6 or 20 per cent. In raising oats he can
pay the same money in as much less time as 24 is to 18, or 33J per
cent., about one-third less time. But prices have materially advanced
this year over the average of the last five years, and are advancing all
along the line. Wheat is now 90 cents in Chicago as against 73 used
in the calculations. In the next five years it is as sure as anything
in the future can be anticipated from the experiences of the past that
a farmer can pay the same sum for a farm or on a mortgage for one-third
less days’ work than in the five years previous to 1860. In fact the sea
son of depression touched bottom from eight to twelve months ago, as
every man in active business knows, and we are now on the upward
grade of prosperity.
Wages or pay from 1868 to 1873 show that for that period the
wage-worker of the country got back about one-fourth of what they had
lost in wages in the long time of depression of wages by the depreciation
of the currency; and from 1873 to 1878 the statistics show that one man
in eight—just think of it lor one moment—one man in eight during that
period was out of employment. I will say frankly I do not believe in
the accuracy of the statistics in this regard. I think there is an error
in it somewhere, though I have not been able to discover where it is.
During this period tariff duties in currency went down, currency appre
ciated, foreign goods came in, the wages in our factories were then at
inflation prices, and the factories shut up and our people were thrown
out of employment.
It can not be possible, I think, however, that so large a number as
one in eight was actually idle. I should rather believe that the num
ber would more nearly approximate one in thirteen or fourteen as an
average number of idle workingmen during that period of five years.
Mr. MILLIKEN. What period do you refer to?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. From 1873 to 1878; before the
cunning little silver chickens had hatched from their eggs. [Laughter. ]
Now, I have given you the figures on the clothing of the farmers,
and I have given you the figures on the machinery^ there are other
tables to which I will also refer.
This question of silver coinage is an economic measure. There is
not an economist in the world who will not take man for the economic
measure, as manifest in his wages; and what the wages of the man
will buy in products we show in gold; and then put that back into the
product and put the product to the man, and that tells us the price of
gold as a unit and the price of men as a unit. Is that not true ? The
gentleman from Illinois [Mr. P a y s o n ] will not dispute that. Does
the gentleman dispute it as an economic fact, I would like to know ?
[A pause.]
WALKER
20
G-iggers................................................................................
Shearers..............................................................................
Plain weavers....................................................................
Spinners..............................................................................
Leather factory, beam and yard hands........................
Leather factorv, whiteners and skivers........................
Common laborers..............................................................
Blacksmiths..........
......................................................
Blacksmiths’ strikers.......................................................
Carpenters.........................................................................
Machinists..........................................................................
Locomotive engineers......................................................
Locomotive firemen.........................................................
SO. 62
.6 2
.69
.6 5
1.10
1.20
1.83
1.00
1.50
1.00
1.67
1.75
2.40
1.20
8O
5
iC
-H
.5
C
<O
o
bo
£
$1.00
.82
1.00
. 85
1.26
1.67
2.75
1.50
2.00
1.50
2.00
2.25
3.20
1.75
Increased wages
in weight of
gold
in 1889
over 1860.
Workmen.
Wages in 1860.
I give here another table bearing upon the question of wages, show
ing the difference in the gold weight of wages from 1860 to 1885.
Per ceni.
61
32
45
31
15
39
50
50
33
50
20
28
33
46
Average percentage of increase in weight of gold received by all workers, 38
per cent.
In 1860 the dyer worked for 62 cents a day. He got a piece of
gold of a given weight, if he wanted it; for, remember, we were
on a gold basis then. Again, in 1889, for the same service, he got a
dollar a day: and he could, if he chose to do it, get a piece of gold of
another given weight, for it was optional with him to take his pay in
gold 60 per cent, heavier than it was in 1860. Gold gone down ? What
do you think ? Now, the spinner got a piece of gold, if he chose to
take it, of 15 per cent, more weight. But I give the whole list here,
all through the factory, all the workmen in it and all the wages paid,
and taking the whole number of them, with the prices they received,
had they elected to take their pay in gold, the same men doing the
same thing and working an hour a day less all over the country, arid in
all of the mechanical pursuits of the country, the gold they got, with •
out reference to its intrinsic value, for I do not want to have anything
to do with that nonsense, was 28 per cent, heavier. That is the fact.
The table shows it.
The facts are that gold has gone off from 25 per cent, to 33 per
cent, and that silver has gone off from 45 per cent, to 50 per cent.
That is the fact; and there is not an economist in this world who is
recognized as a man at all correct in the results that he gets from his
calculations that does not know that is true.
Mr. PAYSON. Is that anything else than another way of stating-----Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Yes, I know-----Mr. PAYSON. Do not answer me before I ask my question. That
is not a good way to do.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. That is true, and I thought you
were through.
Mr. PAYSON. Is that anything more than proving that relatively
WALKER
21
silver has fallen more than gold, from the general standpoint, one 50
per cent, and the other 25 per cent. ?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Of course it is not. That is ex
actly what I am proving, that silver and gold have both depreciated,
and what you silver men deny. If the gentleman has comprehended
me I am amply paid for my whole effort. [Laughter.] Why, do
you not see that my whole effort is to prove that gold and silver have
alike gone down.
Mr. PAYSON. But one more than the other.
Mr. PICKLER. And that one is silver.
Mr. HEARD. How are they alike ?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. They have not gone down alike,
but have alike gone down.
Mr. HEARD. But they are not alike in the place they stop at after
going down.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I know my hour will not begin
to give me time to answer all these economic questions. If you will
give me “ unanimous consent” I will answer the questions outside of
the discussion of this bill.
I am going to vote for this bill. Why? To prevent the free coin
age of silver. Because I know that from 1878 down to the present time
the members of this House, for the purpose of getting back here, have in
dulged, coddled, and miseducated and encouraged the people in their
follies^ That is the point, and therefore we have gotten into their minds
such false ideas that something must be done or they will break our mon
etary system completely up [laughter], and therefore I am willing to
help the boys out. [Renewed laughter.] It is pure politics, gentlemen;
that is all there is about it. We Republicans want to come back and
we do not want you [to the Democratic side] to come back in the ma
jority, because, on the, whole, you must excuse us for thinking we are
better fellows than you are. That is human nature, that is all there is
in this silver bill [laughter on the Republican side]; pure politics.
The gentleman from Illinois [Mr. P a y s o n ] asks me why silver has
gone done. In answer I say tfcat from 1492, when it was 11 to 1, down
to the present time the parity between silver and gold has been chang
ing against silver (Appendix GG). It was held practically in the re
lation to gold of 15 to 1 by hard social conditions for a century, until
about fifty years ago. It was held at that ratio for thirty years in the
Latin Union by power of legislation, in spite of the laws of trade and
the natural tendencies to the contrary. The relation between the two
was interfered with and interrupted by legislation. Those favoring free
coinage of silver are asking that statute law now come in and control
and defeat the laws of nature, for the laws upon which you and I
act and the laws of trade are the laws of nature, in initiation and de
velopment to results, just as much as the growth of a tree or of grain
or of anything else. It continued so long in the relation of 15 to 1
because economic laws were suspended.
For the fifty or sixty years preceding 1825 and through the dark
ages there were wars and turmoils; it was with man a struggle for life,
and not for progress. There was no attempt at economic progress. It
was a struggle for bare life and physical existence, for years, as any
man who has read history knows. For many years this relative depre
ciation of silver has been going on, until now the ratio is 21 to 1, and
no legislation can hinder its course downward, in my j udgment. Being
a Republican and voting politically, I am for this bill. [Laughter.]
W ALKER
Mr. PAYSON. Does the gentleman think he has answered the ques
tion that I asked ? Does he think his statement is any answer to my
question?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. No; I think it is stating what
legislation we do not need.
Mr. PAYSON. I am asking this seriously.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I will say frankly that I did
not answer the gentleman’s question. I laid the foundation for an
answer and then forgot it. That is the fact about it. The McKinley
tariff bill, the administrative bill, and other measures in progress will
satisfy all reasonable demands.
Now, I want to say that the reason silver has gone off from gold is be
cause there is no economic use for silver. I am now talking economics,
not politics. There is gold coin enough, as I will show you in a few
moments, to do all the business of the gold-using world without silver.
I do not mean gold as gold and because it is gold; I mean that there is
coined money that is gold, enough to do the business of the world.
That is what I mean. If we had not that much gold I have no objec
tion to the use of silver, not the slightest; I do not object to it here
or anywhere. If there is any call for it, any economic need for it, I have
no objection to it. Let us use it. But the fact is—and I will refer to
this table now—I will leave the order that I was pursuing in this dis
cussion and take this up now.
The test of the amount of coined money necessary in a country is its
percentage to the foreign commerce of the country more than any other
one thing.
Mr. PAYSON. Let me understand the gentleman’s proposition.
Is it that there is gold coin enough in the world to do the business of
the world ?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. That is my proposition exactly.
Mr. PAYSON. And the rest is all surplusage?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I mean to say that there is a
sufficiency, and “ a sufficiency is enough.’ ’
Mr. PAYSON. That is generalization. Now, as to the fact. The
gentleman says there is gold coin euough in the world to do the busi
ness of the world, and the rest is nothing but surplusage.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. In that form. It is waste*to
keep in the form of coin more than is necessary.
Mr. HEARD. Will the gentleman allow me to ask him a question?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. If it is in the same line.
Mr. HEARD. It is exactly. What do you think about there being
a sufficiency of gold coin in this country to do the business of this
country?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I will answer all that. I will
prove conclusively that there is enough.
Mr. PAYSON. As far as this country is concerned.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Now, you have asked the ques
tion, will you give me a chance to answer it? I ask the gentleman
from Missouri and the gentleman from Illinois, who have been so pro
lific in questions, to listen to what I am about to say. There is no
complaint whatever but what there is gold enough in Germany and in
England.
Allow me to say, furthermore, that the gold, out of the banking sys
tem of any country, the gold that is invisible, is of no more use in
W ALKER
23
the financial system of a country than if it did not exist, becanse gold
that is invisible out of the banks is carried in the pockets of the peo
ple from the habits of the people, and the habits of the people do not
change in one day, two days, or three days, and they will not cease to
get gold and carry it because somebody wants them to. If they keep
it in stockings or in pots, as the French have done, they are not going
to bring it out unless it is in such a case as the payment of the great
indemnity of France to Germany.
Now, then, as my friend from Illinois [Mr. C a n n o n ] says—but I
have not out my left hand [laughter]—now, then [extending his left
arm amid laughter], as to the foreign trade of Great Britain and thp
United States compared with the leading countries—foreign trade in
the total of our purchases and sales.
Foreign trade of Great Britain and the United States with leading countries.
The total of-our purchases and sales to silver-standard
countries is ______________________________________ $100,000, 000
That of Great Britain is--------------------------- ---------------- 570, 000, 000
(5£ times.)
Population, 768,944,456.
Our trade with “ gold and silvei ” countries is------------ 300, 000, 000
That of Great Britain is_____ _______________________ 1, 426, 000, 000
(5 times.)
Population, 187,300,000.
Our trade with single gold-standard countries is______ 800, 000, 000
That of Great Britain_______________________________ 940, 000, 000
(One-eighth more than ours.)
Population, 87,000,000.
Visible gold to commerce in gold countries:
Great Britain:
Visible gold_______________________________ $130,000,000
Commerce___________ ______________________ 3,215,000,000
Commerce to gold, 25 to 1.
Estimated gold in Great Britain __________
550,000, 000
Commerce to estimated gold, 6 to 1,
Germanv:
Visible geld........................................................
175,000, 000
Commerce_________________________________ 1,596,000,000
Commerce to gold, 9 to 1.
Estimated gold in Germany________________
500,000, 000
Commerce to estimated gold, 3 to 1.
Visible gold in the United States to commerce:
Visible gold______________________________
392,000, 000
Commerce-------------------------------------------------- 1,513,000, 000
Commerce to gold, 4 to 1.
Estimated gold in United States____________
680,000,000
Commerce to estimated gold, 2} to 1.
Now, as to visible gold and the gold of commerce. How much is
it?—because outside of this country we are all well enough ( it they
can not depreciate our currency by outside demands they can not do
it in). You have got to put up a Chinese wall around us to hinder
their taking our gold if we give free coinage to silver. The visible
gold to the commerce of Great Britain is only $130,000,000, while
WALKER
24
the commercial was $3,250,000,000. The commerce of Great Britain
as to her gold is 25 to 1. The estimated gold in Great Britain is $550,000,000, and the commerce compared with her estimated gold is 6 to 1.
In Germany the visible gold is $170,000,000; the commerce to gold, 9
to 1, while the visible and the estimated gold of Germany is $500,000,000, and her commerce 3 to 1 of the estimated gold.
The visible gold of the United States to the commerce is $392,000,000. We have double what Great Britain has of gold that is visible
for commercial purposes. The commerce is $1,530,000,000; commerce
to visible gold, 4 to 1. The estimated gold in the United States, how
ever, is $680,000,000, and the commerce to estimated gold is only 21lol.
I think I have answered the gentleman’s question.
Mr. HEARD. What about mine?
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. What is yours?
Mr. HI^-RD. Youstated that there was a sufficiency of gold already
toined to do the business of the entire world, and I asked you how the
fact was with reference to the United States. Have we enough to do
!>ur business?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The time of the gentleman from Mas
sachusetts has expired.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I should like my time extended
for a little, Mr. Speaker.
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. I ask unanimous consent that the gen
tleman be allowed to answer the question of the gentleman from Illi
nois [Mr. W il l ia m s ].
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, if I can have seven
minutes more I will endeavor to answer the question.
Mr. McCOMAS. I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman be
allowed ten minutes more.
Mr. BLOUNT. Which side will that time come out of, Mr. Speaker?
A M ember . It will not come out of either side. It will be given by
unanimous consent.
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. I ask unanimous consent that the gentle
man from Massachusetts be allowed sufficient additional time to an
swer the question of the gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. PAYSON. And I wish the gentleman would answer my ques
tion also.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request that
the gentleman from Massachusetts be allowed to continue for seven
minutes more?
There was no objection.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. While I think of it I wish to
say that it is true there are many conspicuous examples of large
wealth suddenly accumulated by unjust combinations and many by
unwholesome speculations and many by dishonest filching of the prop
erty of others within the letter of statute law, they are comparatively
very few. There are many times more noble men who have devel
oped the resources of the country by the most ho lest and honorable
devotion to business, improving methods and inventing machinery to
cheapen to every consumer than ever before. Yet taking all these
classes together they form but a very small percentage of those engaged
in business. Most of them are working for exceedingly small compen
sation and profits or none at all. It is but two generations from shirt
W ALKER
25
sleeve to shirt sleeve. Read page 4720 of the R e co rd of this Congress
and see how rapidly the, procession moves into and out of the palaces so
much admired. The time the families who live in them average to
occupy them is not ten years and they end their days with scarcely an
exception in very humble places.
The facts and estimates I have given make it clear that the farmer
can buy a farm in as much less time in 1890 as he could buy it in 1860
as 73 is to 58, or with one-quarter fewer days’ work. The extreme de
pression in corn from the terrible overproduction of that commodity
makes the showing in-corn less favorable-----Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. Mr. Speaker, I rise to a point of order.
The unanimous consent that I asked for the gentleman to continue was
in order that he might tell this House and the country how it was that
1,000 bushels of wheat will pay as much on a farm mortgage of $1,000
as it would ten years ago.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I wish the gentleman wdhld come
over nearer to me, because 1 have already read and applied to his ques
tion a table which bears directly on that point. I want to say again
that wheat can be produced with the same number of hours’ labor
to-day and that it will pay the same price per day’s work at 58 cents
a bushel that it paid in I860, when it was produced without our modern
machinery, at 96 cents a bushel; and to-day wheat is selling for 90 cents
and averaged 73 cents for the last few years, which is 20 per cent, above
the selling price of the five years previous to 1860 upon the cost of its
production then and now. It is of no consequence to the farmer
whether he gives 50 or 100 bushels of anything if the 50 bushels costs
him precisely the same as the 100 bushels. If this is not so why do
not corn, oats, and wheat all sell for the same price per bushel ?
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. I shall have to object to the gentleman
continuing unless he answers the question.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. If I have got my seven minutes
to go on and answer this question I have a right to use the time as I
choose in answering it. [Laughter.]
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. I want the gentleman to answer the
question why it is that a thousand bushels of wheat to-day will not
pay as much on a farm mortgage for a thousand dollars as it would ten
years ago.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. Because it does not cost the farmer
in days’ work any more to raise 1,000 bushels of wheat to-day than it
did 500 thirty years ago, both gold-standard times. I am not talking
about bushels of wheat; I am taking about days’ work, and the gen
tleman himself can put them into wheat.
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. The gentleman has taken off his coat
here to speak for the farmers, yet he is attempting to cover this whole
matter up in a fog of words and figures. What the farmer wants to
know is how to pay as many dollars on a debt to-day with 1,000 bush
els of wheat as he could ten years ago with the same number of bushels.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. I hope the gentleman will give
me his attention. What the farmer pays his debt with is his labor on
his farm.
Mr. STONE, of Kentucky. Exactly.
Mr. WALKER, of Massachusetts. We are talking about cur
rency and about the question whether we shall gain by depreciating
our currency; and I repeat that the farmer can pay off his mortgage
W ALKER
26
now, selling his wheat at 58 cents a bushel, using the modern methods
and machinery, with the same number of days’ work that would have
been required to produce the same result in 1860 at 96 cents a bushel.
But the farmer has been getting 73 cents a bushel for his wheat for the
five years ending in 1889, and he is now getting 90 cents; and the same
relation is substantially maintained in other products. Putting his
corn at 26 cents a bushel, it would take the same number of days’ work
to pay off a given amount now that it would have taken in 1860 with
corn at 44 cents; but the farmer is now getting 32 cents for his corn,
although 26 cents a bushel would put him on a par with the condition
in 1860 in days’ work.
This results from the use of the improved machinery of to-day,
which has put down prices; and it is clearly shown by the figures I have
produced here that all commodities that the farmer buys have fallen
in price by a larger percentage than those which the farmer produces.
The farmer does not eat his raw wheat, he does not wear his raw wool,
he does not shoe his family with his raw hides. He sends those prod
ucts to market and buys them back in the form of flour, of woolen
cloths, and of boots and shoes; and I repeat that to-day the products
which the farmer sells will buy 33 per cent, more of those commodities
than the same quantity would have bought in 1860; and if that is a fact
then it follows as a matter of course that the farmer gets so much more
monfcy for each day’s labor now than he did then.
From what I have shown of the condition of the wage-worker and
farmer as compared with that previous to 1873 and as is exhibited in
the value of his wages to him in the tables herewith given, it is clear
that since that date he has had a period of comfort, even of luxury,
compared with any former condition beyond any period in the world,
more than any one can realize unless they have patiently compared the
present with the past. It is no answer to this statement, which is tes
tified to by very careful, industrious, impartial investigators of eco
nomic questions and conditions, to say that strikes, lockouts, and de
mands for shorter hours and more pay have been ever present during
the last seventeen years. The facts are that comparatively few have ex
isted, except from 1873 to 1879.
The world is full of paradoxes; in fact, they seem to be ever present
to vex us in investigating all questions, and economic questions most
of all. It is true everywhere since time began that those who are
the poorest paid and work the longest hours and under the hardest
conditions are seemingly the most contented. The moral animal must
have'progressed into the condition of* man—man as he is recognized
under constitutional government—before they are at a level to be eco
nomically discontented or to contend for happier conditions. Extremes
in all things always meet. It is only those in the happiest and in the
hardest social conditions that are at rest. Unrest and economic strug
gle and contention for better rewards, a larger share, a more equal
division of the world’s products, is a condition precedent to the high
est type of and most rapid progress in social development. This strug
gle shows itself in many hateful forms, but it still remains the preserva
tive and progressive principle in civil society.
The very small volume of currency used in proportion to the busi
ness done, as shown by the record of transactions of national banks, is
conclusive that there is a sufficient supply of money and of gold in the
country.
The total monetary transactions of what are technically called “ clearW ALKER
27
ings” between the New York banks in 1889 were $35,000,000,000. Of
this whole sum the debit and credit of each bank with other banks set
tled this account into 5 per cent, of the total. That is to say, only 5 per
cent, of these total “ clearings ” were made in money of any kind. Of
the money used to pay this 5 per cent, balance, 98.46 per cent, was
gold and 1.54 per cent, was legal-tender notes.
The volume of business done through the clearing-house is not by
any means all the business done by the New York banks. Not a check
or draft made by one depositor upon a fellow-depositor goes to the clearing-house. Counting these sums in the total would probably bring
them up to $54,000,000,000 in 1881 and in 1889. These undisputed
facts show that very little coin or paper money is used or is neces
sary to the immense exchange of merchandise and titles to merchan
dise to day as compared with fifty years ago. One dollar of coin to-day
will measure and touch one-hundred fold more of products in exchange
to-day than one hundred years ago, and $1 in coin made one hundred
fold more effective is economically the equal to increasing our stock of
coin one-hundred fold.
But we have data undisputed and which it is impossible honestly to
question, published in the Comptroller’s report of 1881, which settle
beyond question the office, and the only office, of coin in making the ex
changes in this country, which is to “ measure values ” and the amount
required. The Comptroller issued a request to all the banks in the
country for classified returns of their receipts and payments on debts on
September 17, 1881.
They reported, checks, drafts, etc____________________ $277, 628, 862
Paper money_______________________________________
13, 026, 570
Gold coin___________________________________________
4, 078, 044
500, 301
Silver coin_______________________________________ _
Total_________________ _______________________
295,233,777
Only 1.55 per cent, of this vast sum was in coin and only 4.41 per
cent, in paper money, and 94.04 per cent, was in checks, drafts, and
other form of personal “ money paper. ’ ’ There is eighty-five times as
much visible gold as is thus used by these banks in any one day and
each dollar used in any day is at hand to use on the next day and so on
each following day. This proves there is gold enough in this country
to do the business of the country. There is one hundred and eleven
times as much currency money in circulation as is thus used on any day.
No government in the world holds the precious metals in its treasury
excepting the United States. Even the modern so-called barbarous
nations act on a more civilized idea. This is more ignorant, supersti
tious, wasteful, and foolish action, taking it in its extent and consider
ing our enlightenment in other subjects, than is recorded of any nation
of history.
It is an absolute and indefensible waste of capital. Our Govern
ment is the absolute and unquestioned owner of every dollar’s worth
of wealth existing in the country. The right of taxation is ownership.
An income is all it is possible for individuals or government to get
from productive wealth.
The most magnificent warehouses, the grandest buildings, are of no
more value than the sands of the desert, nor if they were in the bot
tom of the sea, excepting for the income derived from them. The
state, the people, have a legal and moral right to command and com
pel the citizen to surrender property and even life for the common
W ALKER
28
good. It is not for any man on this floor, in the memory of 1862 to
1866, to deny any one of these propositions. Not a dollar beyond the
prudence of approved business necessity have the authorities in this
country any moral right to keep in the public Treasury.
It has no more moral right to have one billion of dollars’ worth of gold
and silver held out of daily use in the public Treasury year alter year
than it has to wring so much from the people and sink it at the bottom
of the ocean. It is in no more practical use in the Treasury than it
would be in the desert of Sahara. It is as much a physical and econom
ical impossibility to derive any advantages from this money in the
Treasury and outside of the banking system of the country, as it would
be to have a billion dollars’ worth of freight cars piled up in the Vir
ginia wilderness, beyond connection with any railroad to help the farm
ers and mechanics in the country to exchange their products on the
railroads of the country. To say that the cars can be put on the rail
roads and this coin put into the banking system and used, is nothing
to the point. This coin is not needed in the banking business of the
country, or the business of the country could not have been done so
long without it, no more than such freight cars are needed, as all
wants for cars are now fully supplied in a legitimate way.
Let us see how the case stands.
To show the utter and exceptional foolishness of our monetary trans
actions, it is only needed to state what an immense sum is lost to our
people by our wasteful financial system.
Not a Government in the world other than the United states holds
any coin in its treasury. No individual, firm, or corporation holds
money in its safe, and it is as wasteful and unreasonable for the United
States Government to do it as for any individual, firm, or corporation.
So far as finances are concerned the Government has no advantage over
a corporation. It is subject to the same commercial laws and must
transact its business upon the same business principles and under the
same limitations, and there is no power that can give it any advantage
over an individual as a business concern, except its power as a brute
force to the injury of all.
By having a billion of gold and silver in its Treasury the people lose
at 4 per cent, interest on that gold and silver $40,000,000 annually.
If this gold and silver in the Treasury is capital and has value there is
no disputing the correctness of this statement. To issue certificates only
shifts the loss to the banks, which is the fact, and this is shown in the fol
lowing tables. The loss to the national banks alone to-day is $27,683,025.54, and this comes directly out of the people, for men do not go into
banking, nor stay in banking, unless they can make as much money as
they can in manufacturing or other business, and anything that cheap
ens money to the banks cheapens it to the people, because others go
into it and put the price of money down.
The Bank of England, the Bank of France, and the Bank of Germany,
all issue notes upon what is to us coin or coin-certificate reserves. If the
Government’s finances were conducted upon any principle approved in
civilized nations this money question would not be constantly before
the people. Our system is the system of four thousand years ago as to
hoarding money. Ninety-nine men out of a hundred if they would give
this subject careful thought and investigation would see that what we
need is to adopt a national banking system analagous to that of other
countries. I append a statement of the savings to the banks by enacting
into a law a bill introduced by me (“ Walker banking code” ), and now
W ALKER
29
before the Committee on Banking and Currency, rather than to con
tinue as they now are:
Table showing the number of national banks in the United States on Feb
ruary 28, 1890, with their capital, bonds, circulation, net deposits, and
reserve held.
B a n k s.
N um ber o f banks .
C a p ita l........................
B o n d s ..........................
C ir c u la t io n ................
N e t d e p o s it s ............
R e s e r v e h e M ...........
N a tio n a l.
State.
3,383
$623,598,200
142,531,500
127,084,555
1,678,150,523
471,183,759
1,671
$166,651,582
N o t rep orted .
N ot ie p o rte d .
N o t r e p o r te d .
N o t r e p o r te d .
P r iv a te .
N ot
N ot
N ot
N ot
1,324
$38,038,690
rep orted .
rep orted .
r e p o r te d .
r e p o r te d .
Table showing loss to national banks on present basis.
T h e b a n k s g e t in te re s t o n th e p a r v a lu e o f th e $142,531,500 at 4 p e r
c e n t ................................................. ............................................................................ $5,701,260.00
In te r e s t o n $121,864,383 c ir c u la tio n at 6 p e r c e n t ...................................... 7,311,862.98
T o t a l p o s s ib le i n c o m e o n b o n d s a n d c u r r e n c y n o t e s ................. 13,013,122.98
T h e b a n k s lo s e o n $173,888,430, p r ic e o f b o n d s a t 6
p e r c e n t ...................................................................................... $10,433,305.80
T a x o f 1 p e r c e n t, p e r a n n u m o n t h e ir c u r r e n c y n o t e s
($128,278,350)..............................................................................
1,282,783.50
A n n u ity v a lu e o f p r e m iu m p a id .........................................
1,246,003.72
R e d e m p tio n c h a r g e s ................................................................
105,000.00
------------------------ 13,067,093.02
A n n u a l n e t lo s s t o a ll th e n a tioria l b a n k s p r o v i d i n g t h e y
w e r e o b lig e d to p u r c h a s e b o n d s to c o m m e n c e b u s in e s s t o
d a y .......................................................................................................... ........
53,970.04
Table showing the gain to national banks issuing currency on a 2 per cent. bond.
$142,531,500 o f b o n d s , at 2 p e r c e n t ..................................................................... $2,850,630.00
$121.864,3S3 c u r r e n c y n o te s , a t 6 p e r c e n t ..................................................... 7,311,862.98
T o ta l p o s s ib le in c o m e o n b o n d s a n d c u r r e n c y n o t e s ................. 10,162,492.98
$142,531,500 in te re s t o n b o n d s , at 6 p e r ce n t .................... $8,551,890.00
T a x o f 1 p e r c e n t o n $128,278,350............................................. 1, 282,783.50
R e d e m p tio n c h a r g e s .......... .......................................................
105,000.00
----------------------- 9,939,673.50
Y e a r ly g a in o n c ir c u la t in g n o te s to n a tio n a l b a n k s u s in g a
2 p e r c e n t, b o n d .........................................................................................
222,819.48
U n d e r th e “ W a lk e r b a n k in g c o d e ,” H . R. 8897, th e b a n k s w o u ld
h a v e th e r ig h t to issu e c u r r e n c y n o te s to th e a m o u n t o f th e ir
c o in a n d e o in -c e r tific a te re se rv e , fr o m w h ic h t h e y n o w r e c e iv e
n o in c o m e , a m o u n tin g t o ............................................................................ $471,183,759. 00
T h e y w o u ld b e re q u ir e d to b u y o f th e G o v e r n m e n t $1 fo r e v e r y
$4 th e y r e c e iv e d o n th e ir r e s e r v e ..................... ..................................... 117,795,939.00
T o ta l n o t e i s s u e ........................................................................................
588,979,698.00
In te re s t a t 6 p e r cen t, o n $471,183,759...........................................................
L e s s r e d e m p tio n c h a r g e s .................................................................................
28,271,025.54
588,000.00
G a in t o th e b a n k s o n th e 2 p e r cen t, b o n d , as s h o w n b y T a b le 2, is..
27,683,025.54
222,819.48
G a in o v e r th e 2 p e r cen t, b o n d p l a n ..........................................................
27,460,206.06
C ir c u la tio n a l lo w e d u n d e r th e “ W a l k e r b a n k in g c o d e ” ...............
P r e s e n t n a tio n a l-b a n k i s s u e ..........................................................................
588,979,698.00
127,084,555.00
A v a ila b le in cre a s e u n d e r “ W a lk e r b a n k in g c o d e ” ..........................
461,895,143.00
W ALKER
30
This would add an average of $7.26 to the present money per capita,
or over $36 per family.
This system would release all United States bonds from the banks
and tend to depreciate their price.
Comparison by years and per capita averages.
In c ir c u la t io n .
G o ld c o in .................................
G o ld c e r tific a te s ...................
S ilv e r c o i n .............................
S ilv e r c e r tific a te s ................
L e s r a l-te n d e r s .......................
N rttion a l-b a n k n o t e s ..........
L e g a l-t e n d e r c e r tific a te s .
T o t a l in a c tu a l c ir c u la t io n .
1873. *
1880.f
$62,718, 312
34,251,320
4,094,655
316, 949, i.45
338, 962,475
31,515, 000
$213,137,469
7,404,340
78, 753,190
5,789,569
313,660,457
337, 415,178
14,235,000
$374,310,922
134, 642,839
111,001,016
292,923,318
339,471,605
185, 641,043
8,795,000
783,490,907
970, 395, 203
1,446,788,773
2.36
.10
16.76
4.39
1.68
13. 26
7.83
6.21
8.21
19.22 |
19.33 !
P e r c a p ita , g o l d c o in a n d ce rtifica te s....
P e r ca p ita , s ilv e r c o in a n d c e r tific a t e s .
P e r ca p ita , p a p e r is s u e s .............................
A v e r a g e g o ld , s ilv e r , a n d p a p e r.
1890. X
22.25
* P o p u la tio n e s tim a te d , 41,000,000— 1873. f P o p u la t io n e s tim a te d , 5G,156,0U)— S80.
J P o p u la tio n e s tim a te d , 65,000,000— 1890.
A P P E N D IX .
C C.
Prices agreed upon by Messrs. Kingsland & Douglas, successors of Kingsland, Fergeson & Co., Simmons Hardware Company, and Mansur & Tib
betts Implement Company, all of St. Louis, Mo.
1889.
Im p le m e n t s .
1880.
$3.50
O n e -lio rs e steel p lo w (w o o d b e a m ) ......................... $2.75
12.00
15.00
T w o -h o r s e ste e l p lo w (w o o d b e a m ).........................
O n e -h o rse iro n p lo w ( w o o d b e a m )...........................
2.00
3.00
T w o -h o r s e iro n p lo w (w o o d b e a m ).........................
8.00 . 10.50
12.00
T w o -h o r s e s id e -h ill o r re v e r s ib le p l o w ................... 10.00
O n e p o t a t o - d i g g e r . . ................................ .......................
12.00
7.50
6.50
10.00
O ld -fa s h io n e d t o o t h h a r r o w ........................................
5.00
O n e -h o rs e c u l t i v a t o r .......................................................
3.50
15.00
25.00
T w o -h o r s e c o r n c u lt iv a t o r ...........................................
70.00
O n e -h o rs e m o w in g -m a c h in e ........................................ 45.00
75.00
T w o -h o r s e m o w in g - m a c h in e ....................................... 50.00
H o r s e r a k e (s u lk y ).........................................................
20.00
25.00
5.00
C o m m o n H u n t r a k e (h o r s e )........................................
3.50
3.75
5.75
C o m m o n ir o n g a r d e n ra k e (10-tootli steel) (d o z .)
25.00
35.00
O n «-h o rs e h o r s e - p o w e r .................................................
T w o -h o r s e h o r s e -p o w e r ................................. ...............
35.00
50.00
R e a p e r ....................................................................................
75.00
85.00
B in d e r ..................................................................................... 135.CO 300.00
O..................................................
o rn -s h e lle r (o n e h o l e )
6.00
8.50
15.00
20.00
F a n n in g -m ill.......................................................................
5.75
3.50
C o m m o n h o e s (ca st-steel s o c k e t), p e r d o z e n ......
2.75
2.00
C o m m o n r a k e s (w o o d ), p e r d o z e n ..........................
S c y th e s (A m e s ’ s g ra s s ), p e r d o z e n ..........................
7.50
12.00
D o .................................................................................
9.50
16.50
9. 50
S c y th e sn a th s (p a te n t), p e r d o z e n .............................
4.50
15.00
S h o v e l (A m e s ), p e r d o z e n .............................................
9.50
16.00
S p a d e s (A m es), p e r d o z e n ............................................... 10.00
C r o w b a r s (ste e l).................................................................
.06
.08
.05
.06
C r o w b a r s (ir o n ).................................................................
* N o n e in use.
WALKER
1873.
$6.50
20.00
5.00
13.00
18.00
20.00
15.00
7.00
28.00
85.00
90.00
30.00
6.50
12.00
45.00
65.00
95.00
1865.
$8.00
26.00
11.50
25.00
6.50
3.00
1&00
21.00
11.00
18.00
18.50
20.00
25.00
20.00
10.00
35.00
105.00
110.00
35.00
8.00
16.00
60.00
80.00
120.00
(*)
15.00
30.00
8.00
4 .0u
21.00
26.00
16.00
20.50
21.00
.10
.15
31
D D.
E s tim a te d
g o ld .
C o u n try .
U n ite d S ta tes..................................... . .......... ......................
U n ite d K in g d o m .............................................................. .
F r a n c e ...................................................... ,r.......... ....................
B e l g i u m ....................................................................................
S w it z e r la n d ......................................................................
G re e c e ...................... ................................................................
S p a in .............................................. ...........................................
P o r t u g a l........ ............................................................................
G e r m a n y ..................................................................................
A u s tr ia -H u n g a r y .................................................................
N e th e r la n d s ........................................................
N o r w a y , S w e d e n , a n d D e n m a r k ..................................
K u s s ia .......................................................................................
T o t a l..............................................................................
V isk>le g o ld .
1689,000,000
550.000.000
900.000.000
65.000.000
140.000.000
15.000.000
2,000,000
100.000.000
40.000.000
500.000.000
40.000.000
25.000.000
32.000, 000
190.000.000
$392,13o, 261
130.000.000
245.000, 000
12,500,000
87.000.000
12.000.000
600,000
20,000,000
5,500,000
175, 000,000
26,000,000
23,000,000
30, 000,000
175.000.000
3,288,000,000
1,333,736,261
E E.
60
43
53
45
48
42
35
48
77
93
74
54
75
82
73
60
60
48
49
75
63
40
44
33
38
44
48
57
50
37
36
40
40
40
32
WALK ER
Cts.
166.3
185.3
152.7
101.5
95
98.1
123
114
130
132
195
140
127
189
138
128
131
147
131
143
112
124
116
133
106
124
111
118
113
107
86
87
89
85
89
M arket p r ice .
Purch a s i n g
v a lu e .
Cts.
Purch a s i n g
v a lu e .
Cts.
114.1
86.7
83.9
66.2
84.1
82
62.1
68.4
76.7
92
60.7
58.6
96
66.4
90.7
76.8
79.7
82.3
80
91.1
93.4
68.8
76.5
71.7
82.5
105.7
106.5
79.9
70.5
70.7
70
71.1
88.2
76.9
63.3
M arket p rice.
Cts.
133
96
94
72
85
82
70
79
106
157
119
105
148
100
130
100
100
92
95
100
97
79
79
64
68
93
100
83
73
69
93
57
68
62
51
Purch as i n g
v a lu e .
Cts.
51.4
39.7
46.4
41.3
47.5
41
31
41.6
55
54
33.8
29.6
53.1
53
50.9
46.1
47.8
42.9
41.2
68.2
59.7
34.8
42.6
33.5
46.1
48.7
45.8
46.2
51.5
50.8
47.4
49.9
51
49.7
39.4
C o tto n p e r
pound.
Cts.
Cts.
Cts.
1
M arket p rice .
Cts.
I
Cts.
1855...
1856 ...
1857 ...
1858...
1859...
1860 ...
1861...
1862 ...
1863 ...
1»64 ...
1865 ...
1866 ...
1867...
1868 ...
1869 ...
1870 ...
1871...
1872 ...
1873 ...
1874...
1875 ...
1 8 7 6 .«
1877 ...
1878 ...
1879 ...
1880...
1881...
1882 ...
1883 ...
1884 ...
1885 ...
1886 ...
1887...
1888 ...
1889...
M e d iu m
w o o l per
pound.
C orn p e r
b u sh el.
P u rc h a s in g
v a lu e .
M arket p rice .
W h e a t p er
b u sh e l.
P u rc h a s in g
v a lu e .
R y e per
b u sh e l.
M arket p rice .
Y e a r.
P u rc h a sin g ’
v a lu e .
M arket p rice .
Oats pe,r
bu sh e l.
142.6 89.2
167.6 74.1
136.3 69.1
93.3 68
94
76.9
98.1 72
109
64
98.7 55
90.4 65.7
81.8
77
99.5 130
78.1 81
82.3 100
122.3 117
96.3 96
98
92
104
76
131
69
110
61
130.2 72
101.6 84
108.1 67
112.3 58
135.1 56
128.7 47
140.9 54
118.2 55
113
67
108.2 68
108
61
96
54
108.5 49
115
47
105.5 55
110.5 47
Cts.
Cts.
76.4 35
38
67
61.6 50
62.5 33
76.7 52
72
50
56.8 40
47.6 50
47.5 68
58.7 78
66.3 100
45.1 65
64.8 53
75.7 43
50
67
70.7 46
60.6 46
61.7 72
51.3 68
65.5 54
74.6 56
58.4 52
56.1 43
56.2 45
49.8 35
61.3 55
58.5 49
64.5 46
65.1 43
61.9 40
58.8 33
61.2 36
60.9 38
66.5 35
55.6 38
30
10.3
34.3 10.3
44.6. 13.5
30.3 12.2
51.4 12
50
10.8
35.5 13
43.3 31.3
49.2 67.2
45.8 101
51
83.3
36.3 43.2
34.3 31.5
27.8 24
34.9 29
35.3 24
36.6 17
64.8 22
57.2 20
49.2 18
53.9 15
45.3 12.9
42.2 11.8
45.7 11.1
42.4 10.8
61.7 11.5
42.6 12
44.2 11.6
41.1 11.9
40.6 10.9
10.5
36
9.3
44.9
49.3 10.2
43.4 10.3
9.9
47.1
8.8
9.3
12
11.2
11.8
10.8
11.5
27.3
48.6
72.3
42.5
24.1
20.4
15.5
20.2
13.4
13.5
19.7
16.8
16.3
14.4
112.4
11.4
1L.2
12
13
12.7
*11.8
11.1
11.7
12.6
12.3
32.3
11.2
12.2
F F.
Bates for 100 pounds from Chicago to New York each year on grain and
provisions for 1860 to 1879, twenty years.
Summerf Wheat.
Years.
Corn.
Oats.
Winter. I
Average.
Average.
1875......................................................
1876......................................................
1877......................................................
1878......................................................
1879.....................................................
$0.50
0.48
0.52
0. 58
0.64
0. 81
0.75
0.67
0.65
0.60
0.53
0.47
0.47
0.47
0.48
0.44
0.40
0.23
0.31
0.20
0.26
$0.30
0.29
0.31
0.35
0.38
0. 49
0.45
0.40
0.39
0.36
0.32
0.28
0. 28
0.28
0.29
0.26
0.24
0.14
0.19
0.12
0.16
1890................................ ......................
0.24
0.15
1859......................................................
1861......................................................
1862...................... ............................
1863......................................................
1805......................................................
1866.....................................................
1867......................................................
1869......................................................
1870......................................................
1871......................................................
1872......................................................
*
*
SO. 28
0.27
0.29
0.32
0.36
0.45
0.42
0.38
0.36
0.32
0.30
0.26
0. 26
0.26
0.27
0.25
0.22
0.13
0.17
0.11
0.15
*
*
f April, May, June, July, August, September.
ber, January, February, March.
80.16
0.15
0.17
0.19
0.20
0.26
0.24
0.21
0.21
0.19
0.17
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.15
0.14
0.13
0.07
0.10
0.06
0.08
★
*
0.11)
0.07
80.59
0.77
0.94
0.96
1.15
1.39
0.86
0.83
0.78
0.64
0.65
0.63
0.64
0.61
0.47
0.45
0.33
0.43
0.33
0.33
*
0.32
%October, November, Decem
Value to the farmer in Chicago, as shown by deducting from the export
prices in New York thefreight from Chicago to New York each year.
W HEAT.
New Y ork !
prices.
j
Years.
I860..............................................
........
............................................................
1865
1870.............................................................
1873............................................................
1880............... ........ ....................................
1889........... ................................. ;
$0.98
1.95
1.28
1.31
1.24
.89
[
Freight
charges.
SO. 29
. 45
.28
.29
. 16
.16
Value in
Chicago.
SO. 69
1.50
1.00
1.02
1.08
.73
CORN.
I860............................................................
1865............................................................
1870............................................................
1873............................................................
1880............................................................
1889............................................................
.72
1.30
.92
.61
.54
.47
.27
.42
.26
.27
.15
.15
.41
.73
.60
.49
.43
.32
.15
.24
.15
.15
.08
.08
.45
.88
.66
.34
.39
.32
OATS.
1860.............................................................
1865.............................................................
1870.............................................................
1873............................................................
1880............................................................
1889.............................................................
WALKER
.26
.49
.45
.24
.35
.21
33
P F—Continued.
I have been unable to get tbe railway freight rates for each year from
1880 to 1889.
All-rail freight from Chicago to New York for 1890 is as follows:
Per 1001 Per
puuods bushel.
Articles.
Cents.
Cents.
20
11*
25
Wheat (60 pounds per bushel)
Corn (56 pounds per bushel)...
Oats (32 pounds per bushel)...
22
15
7
"Western Transit Company, steamer and rail, from Chicago to New
York at the present time is, for wheat, 8J cents a bushel; corn, 7J cents
a bushel; oats, 5J- cents a bushel.
The figures on freights are furnished by J. T. R. McKay, general
freight agent, Cleveland, Ohio.
Of course all-rail freights from Chicago to New York have fluctuated
from 1880 to 1890 as the “ freight wars ” of the trunk lines have waxed
or waned, but it is safe to assume that they are now at their normal
point and will not vary materially for some years, especially as the rail
roads have been under the supervision of the United States Railroad
Commission for two years. They have now averaged for ten years the
present tariff, which averages for 100 pounds only 2 cents less than in
1879, and 2 cents a hundred higher than in 1878. I have therefore
used the rates of 1890 in my calculation for each year since 1879. I
have used for all the years the summer, rather than the winter,
rates.
G E N E R A L F R E IG H T S.
,
Charges per ton per mile for moving merchandise on the New York Central
Railroad talcing all merchandise.
1866...................
1867.............................
1868 ..................... ...........................
1869.............................
1870 .................................................
1871............................
1872 .................. .............
1873 .................................................
1874............................ ....................
1875 ............................ ....................
Cents.
2.742
1.853
1.592
1.573
1.462
1.275
1876
1877
1878
3879
1880
1881
1882
1883
1884
1885
Cents.
.............................................930
.............................................796
.............................................879
......................................
.783
.............................................738
................. ........................... 910
.............................................830
.............................................680
The average charge per ton per mile from 1866 to 1878 (thirteen years) was
1.798 cents. The average charge per ton per mile from 1879 to 1885 (seven years)
was . 8022 cents (8 mills +)•
W ALKER-------3
34
F F—Continued.
[Atkinson, Industrial Progress, p. 58.1
Charges per ton per mile for moving merchandise on the Illinois Central,
Chicago and Alton, Chicago and Rock Island, Chicago, Burlington and
Quincy, Chicago and Northwestern, and Chicago, Milwaukee and St.
Paul Railroads.
1866 ........................ ........................
1867
.........................
186 8
1869 ........................
1870........................ ........................
1871........................ ........................
1872 ....................... ........................
1873 ........................ ........................
1874 ........................ ........................
1875 ........................
Cents.
3.459
3.151
2.423
2.509
2.324
2.188
2.160
1876
1877
1878
1879
1880
1881
1S82
1883
1884
1885
........................................
........................................
....................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
........................................
...................................... ..
Cents.
1.877
1.664
1.476
1.279
1.389
1,405
1.364
1.310
........................ ......... ......... 1.220
The average charge per ton per mile from 1866 to 1878 (thirteen years) was
2.423 cents. The average charge per ton per mile from 1879 to 1885 (seven years)
was 1.303 cents. The average charge per ton per mile from 1866 to 1885 (twenty
years) was 2,031.
G G.
Relative value of silver to gold by periods, 1493-1889.
[Estimated by Dr. A. Soetbeer, in his Edelmetal-Produktion, Gotha, 1879.
See American Almanac, 1887.]
Ratio.
Ratio.
1493 to
1521 to
1545 to
1561 to
1581 to
1520, 28 years...................
1544, 24 years...................
1560, 16 years............ 11.3
1580, 20 years................. .
1600, 20 years..................
11.3 : 1
11.2:1
:1
11.7 : 1
11.9 : 1
Average for 108 years..... 11.5 j 1
1601 to
1621 to
1641 to
1661 to
1681 to
1620, 20 years...................
1640, 20 years..................
1660, 20 years...................
1680, 20 years..................
1700, 20 years...................
1720, 20 years.................. .15.2: 1
1740, 20 years.................. 15.1: 1
1760, 20 years....................14.8: 1
1780, 20 years....................14.8 : 1
1800, 20 years....................15.1: 1
Average for 100 y ears...... 15.0 :1
W ALKE3
1810,10 years.................
1820,10 years.................
1830,10 years.................
1840,10 years.................
1850,10 years.................
15.6
15.5
15.8
15.7
15.8
:1
:1
:1
:1
:1
Average for 50 years..... 15.7 :1
13.0 : 1 1851 to 1855,5 years...................
13.4; 1 1856 to 1860,5 years...................
13.8 : 1 1861 to 1865.5 years............. ..
14.7 : 1 1866 to 1870,5 years...................
15.0 :1 1871 to 1875,5 years...................
Average for 100 years.... ..14.0 : 1
1701 to
1721 to
1741 to
1761 to
1781 to
1801 to
1811 to
1821 to
1831 to
1841 to
15.4
15.3
15.4
15.6
16.0
:1
:1
:1
:1
:1
Average for 29 y ears..... 15.85 :1
1876 to 1880,5 years................... 17.9 : I
1881 to 1885,5 years................... 18.7 :1
1886 to 1889,4 years................... 21.5 :1
A A.
The prime necessaries of life for a family of four persons at the lowest point.
-WALKER
1855.
Supplies
Price.
Flour......................
Corn m eal.............
Granulated sugrar., ..pounds...
Fresh b e e f.............
Corned beef...........
P o r k ......................
Lard........................
Ham........................
Cod fish..................
Tea.........................
C offee.......... a ........
Butter.....................
Cheese...................
Coal.........................
Beans..................
Potatoes.................
Shoes......................
Cotton cloth..........
Prints..................... ...... d o ......
Petroleum .............
Eggs ...............
Denims..................
Satinets.................. .......d o ......
Twenty-three articles average to cost $168.74.............
1856.
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
:oo
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
3
20
20
12
25
5
12
$9.04
4.63
.074
.117
.088
.073
.103
.084
.038
.43
.10
.181
.106
5.60
2.50
.60
1.60
.076
. 098
.833
.32
.077
.73
Total.
$27.12
4.63
11.10
23.40
8.80
7.30
2.47
1.34'
3.80
5.16
2.00
13.57
1.06
22.40
2.50
7.20
4.80
1.52
1.96
10.00
8. CO
.38
8.76
179.27
Price.
$8.34
4.00
.088
.101
.076
.089
.103
.092
.038
.35
.11
.197
.102
4.06
2.50
.60
1.60
.075
.095
.833
.32
.081
.71
Total.
$25.02
4.00
13.20
20.20
7.60
8.90
2.47
1.47
3.80
4.20
2. 20
14.77
1.02
16. 24
2.50
7.20
4.80
1.50
1.90
10.00
8.00
.40
8.52
169.91
Pricg.
$6.97
3.58
.117
.103*
.077
.10
.128
.103
.037
.45
.11
.189
.10
3.92
2.50
.60
1.60
.089
.101
. 833
. 32
! o9
.69
1859.
1858.
1857.
Quan
tity.
Total.
$20.91
3.58
17.55
20.60
7.70
10.00
3.07
1.64
3.70
5.40
2.20
14.17
1.00
15.68
2. 50
7.20
4.80
1.78
2.02
10.00
8. 00
.45
8.28
172.23
Price.
$5.58
3.69
.122
. 1J6
.087
.089
.115
.093
•033
.35
.10
.175
.09
3.83
2.50
.60
1.60
. 082
. 095
.833
.32
.087
.67
Total.
$16.74
3.69
18.30
23.20
8.70
8.90
2.76
1.48
3.30
4.20
2.00
13.12
.90
15.32
2.50
7.20
4.80
1.64
L. 90
10.00
8.00
.43
8.04
167.13
Price.
Total.
$5.93
3.84
.095
.091
.07
.081
.115
.105
.041
.39
.11
. 164
.091
3. 28
2.50
.60
1.60
.08
.095
.833
.32 '
.088
.65
155.17
17.79
3.84
14.25
18.20
7.00
8.10
2.76
1.68
4.10
4.68
2.20
12.30
.91
13.12
2.50
7.20
4.80
1.60
1.90
10.00
8.00
.44
7.80
A A—Continued.
1860.
Supplies.
Price.
Flour....................... .barrels...
Corn meal...............
Granulated sugar .pounds..
Fresh beef...............
Corned beef.......... ..... d o ......
P ork........................
Lard................ ........
Ham.........................
Codfish....................
Coffee......................
Butter......................
Cheese.....................
Coal.........................
Beans.........................bushels...
Potatoes..................
Shoes.......................
Cotton cloth...........
Prints......................
Petroleum............... .gallons...
E ggs.............. ...........
Denims...................
Satinets...................
Twenty-three articles'averaged to cost $179.75...........
1862.
1861.
1863.
1864.
Quan
tity.
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
4
20
20
12
25
5
12
$5.91
3.90
.091
.085
.064
.076
.113
.088
.034
.65
.135
.15
.101
3.28
2.50
.50
.10
.095
.833
.32
.089
.65
Total.
$17.73
3.90
13.65
17.00
6.40
7.60
2.71
1.40
3.40
7.80
2.70
11.25
1.01
13.12
2.50
6.00
4.35
2.00
1.90
10.00
8.00
.45
7.80
152.67
Price.
$5.70
3.41
.089
.086
.065
.086
.099
.096
.031
.30
.137
.152
.103
3.63
2.50
.70
.10
.097
.75
.32
.096
.65
Total.
$17.10
3.41
13.35
17.20
6.50
8.60
2.37
1.53
3.10
3.60
2.74
11.40
1.03
14.52
2.50
8.40
4.20
2.00
1.94
9.00
8.00
.48
7.80
150.77
Price.
$5.64
3.07
.10
.097
.074
.066
.084
.073
.039
.44
.22
. 156
.08
3.33
3.25
.72
.186
.144
.72
.32
.19
.65
Total.
$16.92
3.07
15.00
19.40
7.40
6.60
2.01
1.16
3.90
5.28
4.40
11.70
.80
13.32
3.25
8.64
4.35
3.72
2.88
8.64
8.00
.95
7.80
159.19
The five highest years averaged $261.63,
Price.
$6.46
3.93
.112
.097
.074
.066
.101
.086
.06
.60
.30
.191
.10
5.38
3.25
.80
.36
.212
.62
.32
.335
.875
Total.
$19.38
3.93
16.80
19.40
7.40
6.60
2.42
1.37
6.00
7.20
6.0.
14.32
1.00
21.52
3.25
9.60
4.40
7.20
4.24
7.44
8.00
1.67
10.50
189.64
Price.
Total.
$7.19
5.15
.144
.113
.085
.092
.116
.111
.075
1.00
.415
.294
.118
7.10
3.50
1.00
.52
.332
.523
.32
.53
1.50
246.51
$21.57
5.15
21.60
22.60
8.50
9. 20
2.78
1.77
7.50
12.00
8.30
22.05
1.18
28.40
3.50
12.00
6.45
10.40
6.64
6.27
8.00
2.65
18.00
W ALKER
Supplies.
1865.
Quan
tity.
Price.
..barrels...
Corn m eal..............
Granulated sugar ...pounds...
Fresh b e e f.............
Corned b e e f..........
P o r k ...................... .
L ard ....................... .
H am ........................
C odfish..................
T e a .........................
Coffee......................
Butter......................
Cheese....................
C o a l........................
B ean s..................... .bushels..
Potatoes.................
Shoes.......................
pairs...
Cotton c lo th ...........
Prints.....................
Petroleum.............. gallons...
E g g s....................... ..dozen....
Denims...................
Satinets...................
Twenty-three articles aver
aged to cost $256.37..........
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
$10.41
7.54
.201
.162
.122
.164
.205
.229
.084
1.25
.24
.338
.22
8.38
3.00
1.25
20
20
12
25
5
12
.40
.29
.743
.32
.373
1.37
4
1866.
Total.
$31.23
7.54
30.15
32.40
12. 2a
16.40
4.92
3.66
8.40
15.00
4.80
25.35
2.20
33.52
3.00
15.00
6.45
8.00
5.80
8.91
8.00
1.86
16.44
301.23
Price.
$8.41
4.76
.163
.193
’.145
.159
.198
.166
.07
1.30
.20
.333
.166
7.94
4.00
1.50
.25
.21
.542
.311
.251
1.25
1868.
1867.
Total.
$25.23
4.76
24.45
38.60
14.50
15.90
4.75
2.65
7.00
15.60
4.00
24.97
1.66
31.76
4.00
18.00
6.75
5.00
4.20
6.50
7.77
1.25
15.00
284.30
&No estimate.
Price.
Total.
$8.84
5.47
.104
.162
.122
.131
.145
.128
.068
1.30
.18
.241
.151
5.06
4.00
1.25
.20
.166
.358
.358
.187
1.10
237.08
Price.
1869.
Total.
$26.52 $10.06
5.47
6.15
15.60
.141
32.40
.158
12.20
.119
.314
13.10
3.48
.146
2.05
.125
6.80
.065
15.60
1.30
.16
3.60
.281
18.07
1.51
.137
4.00
20.24
4.00
4.00
15.00
1.25
6.75
4.00 .......*.*18***
.138
3.32
.294
4.29
8.95
.30
.164
.93
13.20
1.12
239.01
$30.18
6.15
21.35
31.60
11.90
11.40
3.50
2.00
6.50
15.60
3.20
21.07
1.37
16.00
4.00
15.00
6.75
3.60
2.76
3.52
7.50
.82
13.44
Price.
Total.
$7.73
5.34
.150
.118
.089
.140
.178
.152
.075
1.20
.125
.366
.161
5.15
4.00
1.00
.18
.14
.327
(&)
.164
.67
220.22
$23.19
5.34
22.50
23.60
8.90
14.00
4.27
2.43
7.50
14.40
2.50
27. 45
1.61
20.60
4.00
12.00
6.75
3.60
2.80
3.92
(&)
.82
8.04
A A—Continued.
w alker
Supplies.
Quan
tity.
1870.
Price.
F lo u r ...................... .barrels...
Corn meal .............. .... d o ......
Granulated sugar ...pounds...
Fresh beef..............
Corned beef............ .
P o rk ........................
Codfish.....................
Colfee............................. d o.....
Butter......................
C heese.....................
bushels...
Potatoes..................
Shoes....................... .
Cotton cloth...........
Prints.......................
Petroleum.............. gallons...
E g g s ........................ .dozens...
D enim s...................
Satinets...................
Twenty-three articles aver
aged to cost $183.13............
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
4
20
20
12
25
5
12
$6.11
5.00
.126
.097
.073
.132
.166
.157
.068
.78
.15
.293
.155
5.07
3.00
1.00
.16
.124
.305
.396
.149
.62
1872.
1871.
Total.
$18.33
5.00
18.90
19.40
7.30
13.20
3.98
2.51
6.80
9.36
3.00
21.97
1.55
20.28
3.00
12.00
6.00
3.20
2.48
3.66
9.90
.74
7.44
200.00
Price.
$6.59
4.48
.132
.116
.087
.109
.132
.114
.058
.81
.165
.215
.137
4.05
3.00
.78
.13
.116
.257
.285
.136
.625
Total.
$19.77
4.48
19.80
23.20
8.70
10.90
3.16
1.82
5.80
9.72
3.30
16.12
1.37
16.20
3.00
9.36
6.00
2.60
2.32
3.08
7.12
6.80
7.50
192.12
Price.
1873.
Total.
$7.10
3.93
.126
.093
.07
.072
.101
.086
.057
.60
.192
.194
.117
4.63
3.50
.78
.143
.12
.249
.203
.152
.55
171.23
$21.30
3.93
18.90
18.60
7.00
7.20
2.42
1.37
5.70
7.20
3.84
14.55
1.17
18.52
3.50
9.36
6.00
2.86
2.40
2.98
5.07
.76
6.60
Price.
$7.56
3.65
.116
.103
.077
.078
.092
.088
.06
.575
.20
.211
.131
3.90
4.00
1.50
.15
.114
.235
.266
.141
.50
1874.
Total.
$22.68
3.65
17.40
20.60
7.70
7.80
2.21
1.41
6.00
6.90
4.00
15.82
1.31
15.60
4.00
18.00
6.00
3.00
2.28
2.82
6.65
.70
6.00
182.53
Price.
Total,
$7.14
3.94
.105
. 109
.082
.082
.094
.096
.053
(&)
.22
.25
.131
4.00
3.00
1.15
.114
.097
.173
.221
.12
.50
169.76
$21.42
3.94
15.75
21.80
8.20
8.20
2.25
1.53
5.30
(b)
4.40
18.75
1.31
16.00
3.00
13.80
5.70
2.28
1.94
2.07
5.52
.60
6.00
Supplies.
1875.
Quan
tity.
Price.
Corn-meal.................... do......
Granulated sugar....pounds...
Fresh beef......................d o .....
Corned beef................. do......
Codfish...........................do......
Coffee............................do......
Butter............................ do......
Cheese...........................do......
Beans........................bushels...
Potatoes......................... do......
Shoes............................ pairs...
Cotton cloth............... yards...
Prints............................ do......
Petroleum.........gallons.........
Denims........................yards...
Satinets......................... do......
Twenty-three articles aver
aged to cost $154.33..........
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
4
20
20
12
25
5
12
1876.
Total.
$5.96
4.42
.108
.116
.087
.101
.138
.114
.062
.47
.17
.237
.135
(b)
3.00
1.00
.12
.087
.141
.266
.111
.50
159.57
$17.88
4.42
16.20
23.20
8.70
10.10
3.31
1.82
6.20
5.64
3.40
17.77
1.35
3.00
12.00
5.55
2.40
1.74
1.69
6.65
.55
6.00
Price.
Total.
$6.21
3.88
.107
.116
.087
.106
.133
.121
.064
.40
.16
.239
.126
4.55
3.00
1.00
.11
.071
.14
.28
.087
.45
$18.63
3.88
16.05
23.20
8.70
10.60
8.19
1.93
6.40
4.80
3.20
17.92
1.26
18.20
3.00
12.00
5.25
2.20
1.42
1.68
7.00
.43
5.40
176. 34
b No estimate.
Price.
1879.
1878.
1877.
Total.
$6.48
3.37
.116
.10
.075
.09
.109
.108
.08
.37
.16
.206
.118
3.00
2.80
.60
.08
.068
.211
.259
.084
.40
157.75
$19.44
3.37
17.40
20.00
7.50
9.00
2.61
1.73
8.00
4.44
3.20
15.45
1.18
12.00
2.80
7.20
5.25
1.60
1.36
2.53
6.47
.42
4.80
Price.
$6.35
3.08
.102
.103
.077
.068
.088
.087
.10
.27
.14
.18
.114
3.25
2.50
.875
.08
.061
.144
.158
.076
.40
Total.
$19.05
3.08
15.30
20.60
7.70
6.80
2.11
1.39
10.00
3.24
2.80
13.50
1.14
13.00
2.50
10.50
4.95
1.60
1.22
1.72
3.95
.38
4.80
151.33
Price.
Total.
$5.25
2.64
.085
.094
.063
.057
.07
.069
.06
.29
.14
.142
.089
2.50
2.50
.625
.08
.062
.108
.155
.075
.40
126.66
$15.75
2.64
12.75
18.80
6.30
5.70
1.68
1.10
6.00
3.48
2.80
10.65
.89
10.00
2.50
7.50
4.95
1.60
1.24
1.29
3.87
.37
4.80
A A —-Continued,
WALKER
Supplies.
Flour....................... .barrels...
Corn meal............... .... do......
Granulated sugar.....pounds...
Fresh beef..............
Corned beef............
Pork........................
Lard........................ ..... do......
Ham.........................
Codfish...................
Coffee.......................
Butter .. ................ .
Cheese......................
Coal.........................
Beans....................... bushels...
Potatoes..................
Shoes....................... .
Cotton cloth............
Prints......................
Petroleum.............. .gallons...
E ggs......................
Denims....................
Satinets....................
Twenty-three articles aver
aged to cost $148.43...........
Quan
tity.
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
4
20
20
12
25
5
12
1880.
Price.
$5.87
2.79
.09
.085
.064
.061
.074
.067
.06
.23
.13
.171
.095
3.90
2.50
.625
.075
.074
.086
.165
.085
.40
1881.
Total.
817.61
2.79
13.50
17.00
6.40
6.10
1.77
1.07
6.00
2.76
2.60
12.82
.95
15.60
2.50
7.50
4.95
1.50
1.48
1.03
4.12
.42
4.80
135.27.
Price.
$5.67
2.92
.092
.086
.065
.077
.093
.082
.055
.26
.116
.198
.111
4.65
3.00
.72
.085
.07
.103
.172
.08
.40
1882. '
Total.
$17.01
2.92
13.80
17.20
6.50
7.70
2.23
1.31
5.50
3.12
2.32
14.85
1.11
18.60
3.00
8.64
4.80
1.70
1.40
1.23
4.30
.40
4.80
144.44.
Price.
$6.15
3.44
.097
.113
.085
.09
.116
.099
.066
.23
.10
.193
.11
4.50
3.00
1.00
1883.
Total.
$13.45
3.44
14.55
22.60
8.50
9.00
2.78
.084
.065
.091
.192
.083
.40
159.71.
1.08
6.60
2.76
2.00
14.47
1.10
18.00
3.00
12.00
4.80
1.68
1.30
1.09
4.80
.41
4.80
Price.
$5.95
3.67
.092
.118
.089
.099
.119
.112
.063
.23
.10
.186
.112
4.75
2.50
.97
.083
.06
.088
.209
.071
.40
1884.
Total.
$17.85
3.67
13.80
23.60
8.90
9.90
2.85
1.79
6.30
2.76
2.00
13.95
1.12
19.00
2.50
11.64
4.65
1.66
1.20
1.05
5.22
.35
4.80
160.56.
Price.
Total.
$5.59
• 3.23
.071
.101
.076
.079
.095
.102
.052
.23
.11
.182
.102
4.50
2.50
.67
.073
.06
.092
.212
.07
.375
142.19.
$16.77
3. 23
10.65
20.20
7.60
7.90
2.28
1.63
5.20
2.76
2.20
13.65
1.02
18.00
2.50
8.04
4.65
1.46
1.20
1.10
5.30
.35
4.50
X&RHVA 1
Supplies.
Flour.......................
Corn-meal.............. ..... do......
Granulated sugar ...pounds...
Fresh beef..............
Corned beef............
Pork........................
Lard........................
Ham ....................... .
Codfish.....................
Tea ......................... ..... do.....
Coffee......................
Butter......................
Cheese.....................
Beans....................... bushels...
Potatoes.................
Shoes.......................
pairs...
Cotton cloth........... yards...
Prints...................... ..... do......
Petroleum.............. .gallons...
Eggs........................
Denims...................
Satinets....................
Twenty-three articles aver
aged to coat $126.22...........
Quan
tity.
3
1
150
200
100
100
24
16
100
12
20
75
10
4
1
12
4
20
20
12
25
5
12
1886.
1885.
Price.
Total.
$4.89
8.13
.064
.10
.075
.072
.079
.092
.08
.241
.09
.168
.093
4.40
3.00
.80
.065
.06
.086
.165
.085
.40
139.25
$14.67
3.13
9.60
20.00
7.50
7.20
1.89
1.47
8.00
2.89
1.80
12.60
.93
17.60
3.00
9.60
4.50
1.30
1.20
1.03
4.12
.42
4.80
Price.
$4.69
1.49
.067
.08
.06
.059
.069
.075
.042
.20
.103
.156
.083
4.40
2.50
.70
.067
.06
.087
.183
.062
.36
123.23
1888.
1887.
Total.
$14.07
1.49
10.05
16.00
6.00
5.90
1.65
1.20
4.20
2.40
2.06
11.70
.83
17.60
2.50
8.40
4.40
1.34
1.20
1.04
4.57
.31
4.32
Price.
Total.
$4.51
1.43
.06
.072
.054
.066
.071
.079
.036
.21
.18
.158
.093
4.00
2.50
.73
.071
.06
.078
.163
.06
.35
119.50
$13.53
1.43
9.00
14.40
5.40
6.60
1.70
1.26
3.60
2.52
3.60
11.85
.93
16.00
2.50
8.76
4.30
1.42
1.20
.93
4.07
.30
4.20
Price.
1889.
Total.
$4.57
1.65
.063
.07
.053
.074
.077
.086
.053
.18
.15
.183
.099
4.00
2.50
.76
.074
.065
.079
.159
.068
.34
123.83
$13.71
1.65
9.45
14.00
5.30
7.40
1.85
1.37
5.30
2.16
3.00
13.72
.99
16.00
2.50
9.12
4.20
1.48
1.30
.94
3.97
.34
4.08
Price.
Total.
$4.83
1.42
.076
.073
.055
.074
.086
.086
.052
.183
.165
.093
4.16
.67
.078
.139
.06
.33
125.28
$14.49
1.42
11.40
14.60
5.50
7.40
2.06
1.37
5.20
2.16
3. 66
12.37
.93
16.64
2.50
8.04
4.10
1.48
1.30
.93
3.47
.30
3.96
A A—-Continued.
“W A L K E R
Amount and purchasing value of a day’s wages of certain mechanics and laborers for the years given.
Years.
3860
1864
1865
1806
1869
1873
1875
1879
1882
1885
1888
Cost of
family
supplies.
$152.
246.
801.
284,
220.
182.
159.
126.
159.
139.
123.
Locomotive fire
men.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
61.20
$1,20
1.5 0
1 .5 8
1.5 8
1.7 5
1.7 5
1 .7 5
1 .5 8
1.7 5
1.75
1.7 5
.9 3
.8 0
.8 5
1.21
1 .4 6
1 .6 7
1.90
1.6 7
1.92
2 .1 6
Locomotive engi
neers.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
$ 2 .40
2 .8 0
3 .0 0
3 .3 0
3 .3 0
3 .3 0
3 .2 0
3 .2 0
3 .2 0
3 .2 0
3 .2 0
$2.40
1 .7 3
1.5 2
1.77
2. 29
2 .7 6
3 .0 6
3 .8 6
3 .0 6
3 .5 1
3 .9 5
Blacksmiths.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
$1.50
2 .2 5
1 .5 0
2 .7 5
2 .7 5
2 .5 0
2 .5 0
1 .7 5
$ 1 .50
1.3 9
.7 6
1 .4 8
1.9 1
2.0 9
2 .3 9
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.91
2 .1 9
2 .4 7
2.11
Laborers.
Carpenters.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
$1.00
$1.00
1 .5 0
1 .5 0
1 .7 5
1.7 5
1 .7 5
1 .7 5
1 .2 5
1 .5 0
1 .5 0
1 .5 0
.9 3
.7 6
.9 4
1.21
1 .4 6
1 .6 7
1.5 1
1 .4 3
1 .6 4
1 .8 5
W ages.
Pur
chasing
value.
$1.67
2 .5 0
2 .5 0
3 .0 0
2 .7 5
2 .5 0
2.5 0
1 .7 5
$ 1 .67
1 .5 5
1.2 7
1.6 1
1.91
2 .0 9
2 .3 9
2.00
2.00
2.00
1.9 1
2 .1 9
2 .4 7
2.11
to
Amount and purchasing value of a month's wages of farm laborers for the years given,.
W ALKER
Years.
1860.................................
1866.................................
1869.................................
1873..................................
1875.................................
1879.................................
1882.................................
1885.................................
1888.................................
Cost of
family
supplies.
$152.67
284.30
220.22
182.53
159.57
126.66
159.71
139.25
123.83
Eastern States.
Middle States.
Western States.
Southern States,
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
Wages.
Pur
chasing
value.
Wages.
$24.00
33.00
32.00
30.00
29.00
20.00
26.00
25.00
26.00
$24.00
17.72
22.18
25.09
27.75
24. LI
24.85
27.41
32.06
$22.00
30.00
28.00
27.00
26.00
20.00
22.00
23.00
23.00
$22.00
16.11
19.41
22.58
24.88
24.il
21.03
25.22
28.36
$21.00
29.00
27.00
25.00
24.^0
20.00
24.00
22.00
22.00
$21.00
15.57
18.72
20.91
22.96
24.11
22.94
24.12
27.12
$16.00
17.00
16.00
16.00
13.00
15.00
14.00
14.00
California.
Pur
chasing Wages.
value.
$8.59
11.79
13.38
15.31
15.67
14.34
15.35
17.26
$30.00
86.00
46.00
45.00
44.00
41.00
38.00
38.00
38.00
Pur
chasing
value.
$30.00
19.33
31.89
37.64
42.10
49.42
36.32
41.66
46.85
BB.
Price of agricultural implements and of wheat, com, oats, wool, and cotton, with cost of agricultural implements in com, oats, wool, and cotton,
for the years given*
Cost of imp 1ements
in pounds.
Price per
pound.
Cotton.
Cost of impl ements
in pounds.
Price per
pound.
Wool.
Cost of impl ements
in bushels.
Price per
bushel.
Oats.
1Cost of imp 1ements
in bushels.
Price per
bushel.
Price.
Com.
Cost of imp 1ements
in bushels.
Implements.
Price per
bushel.
Wheat.
O N E-H O R SE STEE L P L O W (W O O D BE A M ).
1865..................................... .........................
$ 8 .0 0
1880................................... .............................
1889................................................................
6.50
3.50
2.75
$1.50
1 .0 2
1.08
.73
5.3
6.4
3.2
3.8
£0.88
.34
.39
.32
9.0
19.1
8.9
8.5
$0.49
.24
.35
.24
11.5
13.3
14.7
9.2
8.9
.88
.34
.39
.32
22.7
44.1
25.6
20.3
.49
.24
.35
.24
40.8
62.5
28.5
27.0
1 .0 0
6.7
6.8
4.6
4.7
.88
.34
.39
.32
11.3
20.5
20.4
29.1
14.3
14.5
1 .0 0
1 0 .0
.83
1 2 .0
.68
.55
.38
10.3
9.1
9.2
.2 0
.12
10.9
.49
.24
.35
.24
35.0
41.6
85.0
23.3
27.4
23.1
20.5
.88
.34
.39
.32
39.7
82.4
64.1
46.8
.49
.24
.35
.24
71.4
116.6
71.4
62.5
1 .0 0
.6 8
35.0
41.2
45.4
39.5
16.3
27.0
1 0 .0
$ 1 .0 0
.68
.55
.38
8.0
9.6
6.4
7.2
$0.83
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
9.6
32.5
29.2
27.5
O L D -F ASH IO N E D TOOTH H A R R O W .
1865.... .........................................................
1873................................................................
1880...............................................................
1889...............................................................
2 0 .0 0
15.00
1..50
1 .0 2
6.50
3.08
.73
1 0 .0 0
7 .0 0
1 .0 2
5.00
3.50
1.08
.73
35.00
28.00
25.06
15.00
1.08
.73
1 0 .0 0
.68
.55
.38
2 0 .0
2 2 .0
18.2
17.0
.83
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
24.0
75.0
83.3
65.0
ON E-H OR SE C U LT IV A TO R .
1865................................................................
1873.............. .................................................
1880................................................................
1889................................................................
1 2 .8
.1 0
TW O -H O R SE CORN C U LTIVATO R .
1865................................................................
1873..................................................... ..........
1880.............,.................. ........ . ....................
1889................................................................
1.50
1.50
1 .0 2
.55
.38
.83
.2 0
.12
.10
42.1
140.0
208.3
150.0
O N E-H OR SE M O W IN G M A C H IN E.
1865................................................................
1873................................................................
1880................................................................
1889................................................................
105.00
85.00
70.00
45.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
70.0
83.3
64.8
61.6
.88
.34
.39
.32
119.3
250.0
179.4
140.6
.49
.24
.35
.24
214.2
354.1
200.0
187.5
1.00
.68
.55
.38
105.0
125.0
127.2
118.4
.83
.20
.12
.10
126.5
425.0
583.3
450.0
110.00
90.00
75.00
50.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
73.3
88.2
69.4
68.5
.88
.34
.39
.32
125.0
264.7
192.3
156.2
.49
.24
.35
.24
224.5
375.0
214.3
208.3
1.00
.68
.55
.38
110.0
132.3
136.3
131.6
.83
.20
.12
.10
132.5
450.0
625.0
500.0
26.00
20.00
15.00
12.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
17.3
19.6
13.8
16.4
.88
.34
.39
.32
29.5
58.8
38.5
37.5
.49
.24
.35
.24
53.0
83.3
42.8
50.0
1.00
.68
.55
.38
26.0
29.4
27.3
31.6
.83
.20
.12
.10
31.3
100.0
125.0
120.0
5.00
3.00
2.00
1.02
1.08
.73
4.9
2.7
2.7
.34
.39
.32
14.7
7.6
6.2
.24
.35
.24
20.8
8.5
8.3
.68
.55
.38
7.3
5.4
5.2
.20
.12
.10
25.0
25.0
20.0
13.00
10.50
8.00
1.02
1.08
.73
12.7
9.7
10.9
.34
.39
.32
38.2
26.9
25.0
.24
.35
.24
54.1
30.0
33.3
.68
.55
.38
19.1
19.1
21.0
.20
.12
.10
65.0
87.5
80.0
20.00
18.00
12.00
10.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
13.3
17.6
11.1
13.7
.88
.34
.39
.32
22.7
52.9
30.7
31.2
.49
.24
.35
.24
40.8
75.0
34.2
41.7
1.00
.68
.55
.38
20.0
26.4
21.8
26.3
.83
.20
,12
'10
24.1
90.0
100.0
100.0
25.00
20.00
12.00
7.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
16.6
19.6
11.1
10.2
.88
.34
.39
.32
28.4
58.8
30.7
23.4
.49
.24
.35
.24
51.0
83.3
34.2
31.2
1.00
.68
.55
.38
25.0
29.4
21.8
19.7
.83
.20
.12
.10
30.1
100.0
100.0
75.0
T W O -H O R SE M O W IN G M A C H IN E .
1865................................................................
1873................................................................
1880......................... ......................................
1889................................................................
T W O -H O R S E STEEL P L O W (W O O D BEA M ).
1865................................................................
1873................................................................
1880................................................................
1889................................ ...............................
O N E-H OR SE IRON P L O W (W O O D B EAM ).
1873................................................................
1880................................................................
1889................................................................
T W O -H O R SE IR O N P L O W (W OO D B E A M ).
1873................................................................
1880................................................................
1889................................................................
TW O -H O R S E
S ID E -H IL L OR
PLOW .
R E VER SIB LE
1865........................................................ ......
1873 ..............................................................
1880...............................................................
1889...............................................................
POTATO D IG G E R .
1865..............................................................
1873 ..............................................................
B B—Continued.
Cost of impl ements
in pounds.
Price per
pound.
Cotton.
Cost of impl ements
in pounds.
Price per
pound.’
W ool.
Cost of imp 1e ments
in bushels.
Oats.
Pri ce per
bushel.
Pri ce per
bushel.
Cost of impl ements
in bushels.
Price.
Pr i c e per
bushel.
Implements.
Corn.
Cost of impl ements
in bushels.
W ALKER
Wheat.
HORSE-RAKE (SULKY)
1865.......... ..........................................................................
1 8 73 ....................................................................................
1 8 80....................................................................................
1889....................................................................................
35.00
30.00
25.00
20.00
1.5C
1.0 2
1.0 8
.7 3
23.3
29.4
23.1
27 .4
.8 8
.3 4
.3 9
.3 2
39.7
8 8 .2
64 .1
G2.5
.4 9
.2 4
.3 5
.2 4
7 1 .4
125.0
7 1 .4
8 3 .3
1.0 0
.6 8
.5 5
.3 8
3 5 .0
44 .1
4 5 .4
5 2 .6
.8 3
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
42 .1
150.0
208.3
200.0
COMMON HAND-RAKE (HORSE).
1865 .................................................................................
3 8 73....................................................................................
1 8 80....................................................................................
1 8 89....................................................................................
8.0 0
6.50
5 .0 0
3.5 0
1.50
1.0 2
1.08
.7 3
5 .3
6 .3
4 .6
4 .8
.8 8
.3 4
.3 9
.3 2
9 .0
19 .1
1 2 .8
1 0 .9
.4 9
.2 4
.3 5
.2 4
1 6 .3
2 7 .0
1 4 .2
1 4 .5
1.0 0
.6 8
.5 5
.3 8
8 .0
9 .6
9 .0
9 .2
.8 3
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
9 .6
3 2 .5
4 1 .6
3 5 .0
1 6.00
12.00
5 .7 5
3 .7 5
1 .5 0
1.02
1.08
.7 3
10 .6
11.7
5 .3
5 .1
.8 8
.3 4
.3 9
.3 2
18 .1
3 5 .2
1 4 .7
11 .7
.4 9
.2 4
.3 5
.2 4
3 2 .6
5 0 .0
1 6 .4
1 5 .6
1 .0 0
.6 8
.5 5
.3 8
3 6 .0
1 7 .6
1 0 .4
9 .8
.8 3
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
1 9 .3
6 0 .0
4 7 .9
3 7 .5
60.00
4 5.00
35.00
25.00
1.5 0
1.02
1.08
.7 3
40 .0
44 .1
3 2 .4
34 .2
.8 8
.3 4
.3 9
.3 2
6 8 .1
132.3
89 .7
78.1
.4 9
.2 4
.3 5
.2 4
12 2.4
187.5
100.0
104.1
1 .0 0
.6 8
.5 5
.3 8
6 0 .0
6 6 .2
6 3 .6
65 .8
.8 3
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
7 2 .3
2 2 5 .0
29 1.6
250.0
120.00
95.00
-8 5 .0 0
75.00
1.5 0
1.02
1.0 8
.7 3
80 .0
93.1
78 .7
102.7
.8 8
.3 4
.3 9
.3 2
136.3
279. i
217.9
234.3
.4 9
.2 4
&5
.2 4
244.9
39 5.8
242.8
312.5
1 .0 0
.6 8
.5 5
.3 8
120.0
139.7
154.5
197.3
.8 3
.2 0
.1 2
.1 0
1 4 4.6
47 5 .0
708.3
7 5 0.0
-
COMMON IRON GARDEN-RAKE (10-TOOTH,
s t e e l ).
ONE-HORSE HORSE-POWER.
1 8 6 5 ....................................................................................
1 8 7 3 .................................................................. ................
1 8 8 0 ....................................................................................
1 8 8 9 ....................................................................................
REAPER.
18 6 5 ....................................................................................
1 8 7 3 ....................................................................................
18 8 0 ....................................................................................
.
BINDER.
1880..
1889...............................................................
300.00
135.00
1.08
.73
277.7
184.9
.39
.32
769.2
421.8
.35
.24
857.1
562.5
.55
.38
545.4
355.3
.12
.10
2,500.0
1,350.0
CORN-SHELLER (ONE HOLE).
1865..
1873...............................................................
1880...............................................................
1889...............................................................
$15.00
11.50
8.50
6.00
$1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
10.0
11.2
$0.88
.34
.39
.32
17.0
33.8
4.8
18.7
$0.49
.24
.35
.24
30.6
47.9
24.3
25.0
$1.00
.68
.55
.38
15.0
16.9
15.4
15.8
$0.83
.20
.12
•10
18.1
57.5
70.8
60.0
30.00
25.00
20.00
15.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
20.0
24.5
18.5
20.5
.88
.34
.39
.32
34.0
73.5
51.2
46.8
.49
.24
.35
.24
61.2
104.1
57.1
62.5
1.00
.68
.55
.38
30.0
36.7
36.3
39.5
.83
.20
.12
.10
36.1
125.0
166.6
150.0
8.00
6.50
5.75
3.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
5.3
6.3
5.3
4.7
.88
.34
.39
.32
9.0
19.1
14.7
10.9
.49
.24
.35
.24
16.3
27.0
16.4
14.5
1.00
.68
.55
.38
8.0
9.5
10.4
9.2
.83
.20
.12
.10
9.6
32.5
47.9
35.0
4.00
3.00
2.75
2.00
1.50
1.02
1.06
.83
2.9
2.5
2.4
2.6
.88
.34
.39
.32
4.5
8.8
7.0
6.2
.49
.24
.35
.24
8.1
12.5
7.8
8.3
1.00
.68
.55
.38
4.0
4.4
5.0
5.3
.83
.20
.12
.10
4.8
15.0
22.9
20.0
21.00
16.00
12.00
7.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
14.0
15.7
.88
.34
.39
.32
23.8
47.0
30.7
23.4
.49
.24
.35
.24
42.8
66.6
34.2
31.2
1.00
.68
.55
.38
21.0
23.5
21.8
19.7
.83
.20
.12
.10
25.3
80.0
100.0
75.0
26.00
21.(0
16.50
9.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
.88
.34
.39
.32
29.5
61.7
42.3
29.6
.49
.24
.35
.24
53.0
87.5
47.1
39.5
1.00
.68
.55
.38
26.0
30.9
30.0
25.0
.83
.20k
.12
.10
31.3
105.0
137.5
95.0
7.8
8.2
FANNING MILL.
1865...
1873..............................................................
1880..............................................................
1889..............................................................
COMMON HOES (CAST-STEEL SOCKET).
1880 ................................................... do......
1889 ....................................................do......
1865 ...
1873
1880 ...
1889
COMMON RAKES (WOOD).
SCYTHES (AMES’S GRASS).
1865
1873
1880 ................................................ do......
1889
1865
1873
1880 ..
1889
SCYTHES (OTHER).
ll.'l
10.2
17.3
20.6
15.2
13.0
B B—-Continued.
Cost of imp 1ements
in pounds.
Cost of imp 1ements
in pounds.
Price per
pound.
Price per
pound.
Cotton.
Wool.
Cost of imp 1ements
in bushels.
Price per
bushel.
Oats.
Cost of imp 1ements
in bushels.
Price per
bushel.
Price.
Corn,
Cost of imp 1ements
in bushels.
Implements.
Price per
bushel.
Wheat.
SC Y T H E SN ATH S (P A T E N T ).
1889................................................... do......
16.00
11.00
9.50
4.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
10.6
10.8
8.8
6.1
.88
.34
.39
.32
18.1
32.3
24.3
14.0
.49
.24
.35
.24
32.6
45.8
27.1
18.7
1.00
.68
.55
.38
16.0
16.2
17.3
11.8
.83
.20
.12
.10
19.3
55.0
79.2
45.0
20.50
18.00
15.00
9.50
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
13.6
17.6
13.8
13.0
.88
.34
.39
.32
23.2
52.9
38.4
29.6
.49
.24
.35
.24
41.8
75.0
42.8
39.5
1.00
.68
.55
.38
20.5
26.5
27.3
25.0
.83
.20
.12
.10
24.7
90.0
125.0
95.0
21.00
18.50
16.00
10.00
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
14.0
18.1
14.8
13.7
.88
.34
.39
.32
23.8
54.4
41.0
31.2
.49
.24
.35
.24
42.8
77.0
45.7
41.6
1.00
.68
.55
.38
21.0
27.2
29.1
26.3
.83
.20
.12
.10
25.3
92.5
133.3
100.0
.08
.06
1.08
.73
.07
.08
.39
.32
.20
.18
.35
.24
.22
.25
.55
.38
.15
.16
.12
.10
.66
.60
.15
.10
.06
.05
1.50
1.02
1.08
.73
.1
.09
.05
.06
.88
.34
.39
.32
.17
.29
.15
.15
.49
.24
.35
.24
.30
.41
.17
.20
1.00
.68
.55
.38
.15
.14
.11
.13
.83
.20
.12
.10
.18
.50
.50
.50
SHOVELS (AM ES’ S).
1880................................................... do......
1889................................................... do......
SPADES (AM ES’ S).
C ROW BARS (STEEL).
CROW BARS (IR O N ).
1873................................................... do......
49
Statement of Hon. H. M. T e l l e r , Senator from the State of Colo
rado, Monday, January 27, 1890:
I regard the silver question as one of the most important that can come be
fore Congress. I think it overshadows all other questions; I think it is as wide
* as the commerce of the world. It is not local, it is general. I think the gen
eral financial depression that pervades the whole world at this time is largely
to be attributed to the treatment of silver since 1873.
I said the general depression in business, the low price that pervades all sec
tions of the country, X attribute very largely to the lack of proper facilities for
doing business.
I believe the present fall in prices in this country which have been continu
ous, as we all know, since 1873, is to be largely attributed to; our treatment of
the silver question.
I am free to say it is not caused by increased production.
Mr. W a l k e r . Would it not have the same effect you are seeking, that is, the
depreciation of the gold dollar, by putting less gold in a dollar ? That would
raise the prices; that is nominally.
Mr. T e l l e r . Certainly; I have not any doubt about that. And if you put
more money in circulation it would raise prices properly.
I say that silver has not depreciated, because I say that compared with com
modities it will buy more commodities to-day than it would fifteen years ago,
when it stood at 15|.
Mr. W a l k e r . Do you believe there ever was a time when the country has
grown more rapidly in wealth than in the last five years?
Mr. T e l l e r . I d o not know about that. For five years we have been very
prosperous, I admit.
Mr. W a l k e r . And that during that time the most important advances have
been made.
Mr. T e l l e r . It is true w e h a v e h a d prosperity. I do not deny it.
Mr. W a l k e r . You spoke o f gold not being money enough to do the business
of the world. Is not the exchange of money for products of any kind more ap
parent than real ? Is not it a fact that in the exchanges for products it is there
fore immaterial what is the standard of value so that it is uniform and contin
ues so ? That is to say, if a product is exchanged for a product, and not money
or product, is not the use of coin m o r e apparent than real?
Mr. T e l l e r . Undoubtedly. The great business of the country is not done by
payment of money from hand to hand.
Mr. W a l k e r . It i s product for product?
Mr. T e l l e r . I t is virtually product for product, but it is done by the exchange
of the monetary system.
Originally the relation of silver was fixed by the consent of the merchants
who used it—that is, its relationship to gold—without legislation. I think there
never was any legislation on the subject of fixing the relation towards gold until
the French fixed it in 1885. If there was I never found itvand I have given it a
good deal of attention. Previous to that time its relation was fixed by the con
sent of the merchants in exchange. It changed, of course, as gold became more
plentiful and silver became more plentiful. Its relations have not always,been.
stable, but it has been practically stable for a great number of years.
U n i t e d S t a t e s S e n a t e , Washington, D. C„ March 5,1890.
D e a r S i r : In reply to your inquiry as to my ideas as to the difference be
tween a warehouse receipt as known to trade and a gold certificate from the
Treasury, I would say: If the gold certificate issue under the provisions o f
section 254 of the Revised Statutes for a certain number of ounces of gold bull*
ion,, 1 see no difference whatever. If, however, the certificate is issued, as I
understand is the practice, not for the delivery of a certain number of ounces
of gold bullion, but payable in dollars, it can hardly be said that there is no
difference between such certificates and a warehouse receipt as known to the
trade. But, as I said of Mr. Windom’s proposed Treasury receipts, it is not
unfair to speak of this as a warehouse receipt, although technically it is not
such.
Yours, very truly,
H. M. TELLER.
Hon. J. H. W a l k e r , House of Representatives.
w a l k e r
-------- 1
O
@FedFRASER