Debate of Oct. 29, 1896.Question: "Resolved, That free conage of silver at 16-1 would so raise the price of silver as to prevent any depreciation or debasement of the just currency standard."

Brief for the Affirmative.J. D. PHILLIPS and W. W. WORMELLE.

Best general references: Barker's Bimetallism; E. A. Rose's Honest Dollars, J. F. Orton's Shall We Change our Money Standard? and Review of Reviews for Sept. '96.

I. The just currency standard is somewhere between that of 1873 and that of 1896. A. The gold standard has greatly appreciated since 1873. (1) It will buy more now than it would then. (a) Prices in England reckoned from 45 staple articles have fallen from 100 to 62 (Sauerback's Estimate in "Honest Dollar," p. 24). (b) Prices in Germany reckoned from 100 articles have fallen 35 per cent (Honest Dol. p. 25). (c) Prices in America have fallen from 100 to 61 (Barker's Bimetallism, p. 278). (2) The claim that falling prices are due to cheapening of production is unfounded. (a) It is imporbable that all articles would have fallen in price so uniformly in regard to gold. (b) Silver has mean-while remained at the same level with other prices. (3) Tho claim that overproduction has caused the fall in prices is unfounded. (a) Population has increased faster than production since 1873. B. The only fair dollar is one which is just the average dollar at which debts incurred since 1873 have been contracted.

II. The free coinage of silver at 16 to 1 would approximate as near to the just currency standard as any financial expedient possible. A The gold standard is manifestly above it (see I. A). B. The bimetallic standard would be above that of 1873 and below the present. (1) The gold displaced by silver in U. S. at first would pull down the appreciated value of gold in gold standard countries. (Orton, p. 26). 2 The price of silver for monetary purposes wouldrise. (a) There would be an increased demand. (x) We greatly need a greater supply of money. (r) To pay our debt of $6,000,000,000 to England. (s) To pay our immense farm mortgages. (b) The supply would remain almost the same. (x) But little of the 4,000,000,000 of silver in world would come here. (m) European silver (1,300,000,000) would not come. (z) Their coinage ratio being only 15 1-2 to 1. (n) The scanty currency of Mexico and Central America (97,000,000,000) would not be depleted for our sake. (z) They would suffer more than they could possibly gain by sending in their silver. (o) The silver of the rest of the world (1,700,000,000) would not injure us. (z) It probably would not come at all. (y) If it did it would only come in exchange for American products. (C) With a greatly increased demand and but slightly increased supply silver would rise here.

Brief for the Negative.W. A. HOLT and F. H. KINNICUT.

Best general references: F. W. Taussig, Silver Situation in U. S., pp. 92-132; Henry W. Farnham, Yale Review, Aug. 1894; E. B. Andrews, Atlantic, April, 1894; E. B. Andrews, Atlantic, April, 1893; Carl Schurz Speech at Chicago, Sept, 5, 1896; Professor Laughlin, Review of Reviews (Am. ed), Sept., 1896.

I. The present standard is the just one. A. There has been no appreciation of gold. (1) The so-called appreciation of gold is in reality a depreciation of commodities. (a) Money incomes and wages have risen all over the world. (Taussig, Silver Sit., p. 108.) (b) Whatever fall in price of commodities has taken place is due to improvements in production alone. (Carl Shurz, Chicago speech, p. 6). (x) During the nine years after 1873, although under a gold standard, the price of commodities rose; (Schurz Chic. Speech, p. 6). (y) It is only since the enormous increase of production after 1880, due to increased facilities, that price of commodities has gone down; (Schurz Chic. Speech, p. 6; Taussig. Silver Sit., p. 105). B. The change in the gold value of commodities is not unfair to the debtor. (1) Though he pays debts with more commodities, yet the labor equivalent is the same; (Taussig. Silver Sit., p. 109). (2) His money income is at least no less; (Taussig Silver Sit., p. 108).

II. Free coinage of silver by U. S. at ratio of 16 to 1 would not raise silver to parity with gold. A. The legal tender quality alone will not keep silver at par. (1) This is disproved by (a) Case of present Mexican dollar; (b) Case of greenbacks during the war (Laughlin Rev. of Rev., Sept. '96). B. History shows that an increased demand for silver for use in coinage has not caused a permanent rise in the price of silver. (1) From '78 to '93 the price of silver has steadily fallen, though, (a) during that period the U. S. took $600,000,000 worth off the market. (b) During the same period India also took $600,000,000 worth (Laughlin, Rev. of Rev., Sept '96; H. W. Farnham, Yale Rev., Sept. '94). (C) The example of France (1803-'73) is irrelevant. (1) Her success in maintaining gold at parity after 1849, was due to temporary nature of the appreciation. (Farnum, Yale Rev., Aug., '94). (2) She succeeded in keeping silver at par only by makeshifts. (Moreton Trewen, Fort. Rev., June, 1893). (3) She finally abandoned free coinage. D. The demand created by free silver coinage in U. S. would not raise silver to parity with gold. (1) Demand would at most be for only $600,000,000 to replace the gold withdrawn. (Laughlin, Rev. of Rev., Sept., '96). (2) There would be no increased demand for money in business. (Ibid, June, '96). (a) Business would be prostrated by the panic caused by change of standard. (Laughlin, Rev. of Rev., Sept. '96). (3) The ordinary demand would immediately be met by, (a) Foreign silver in exchange for our gold, (b) Increased activity of silver mines everywhere. (E. B. Andrews, Athlantic, April, '93).