Slike strani
PDF
ePub

Act of March, 1900, the policy has been further emphasized by securing the eventual retirement of all $1, $2, and $5 greenbacks in favor of silver certificates, and by providing that ninetenths of the latter shall be of denominations of $10 and less. In a word, the government's policy, as it has developed since 1886, and has now become crystallized in legislation, looks to basing our smaller currency largely on silver. Coins and notes in denominations of $10 and less now aggregate roughly half of the total currency aside from gold; of this sum more than 50 per cent. at present consists of silver coin and certificates; and in time this percentage must rise considerably. Of this sum, moreover, an insignificant part is subsidiary token currency, namely the fractional coins, a limited legal tender and redeemable in “lawful money." The great mass represents full legal tender dollars or promises to pay them and not gold. Our government then has evidently chosen a policy which puts it in line with that of the Latin Union and until recently, that of Germany in perpetuating the full legal tender coins of a past period, but in avoiding provisions for the redemption of that coin in gold; and in so far temporizing with the final settlement of the currency problem.

It is, however, not our purpose to question the advisability of that policy or suggest any other; but rather to examine some of the consequences of its adoption. One provision of the Act of March, 1900, is unqualifiedly good, the one calling for the cancellation of the Treasury Notes of 1890. During their ten years' existence, these notes have made no friends, and their exit will be welcomed by all. The banknotes and greenbacks are left to compete with each other and with gold and gold certificates in supplying the means for large payments. Banknotes are to be crowded out of the small denominations, though less rapidly and completely than the greenbacks, which are limited to denominations of $10 and over, while the gold certificates will continue to circulate as now in denominations of $20 and over. The continuance of this triangular competition among three forms of large denomination notes as a permanent feature of our currency is the weak point in the recent legislation. Banknote currency has not been equal to the competition with other forms of

currency since the laws of 1878 introduced the silver certificate and authorized the re-issue of redeemed greenbacks. The partial removal of the former as a competitor will not permanently open a wide field of usefulness for the national banknotes, however much we may relax the requirement of bond deposit and similar provisions. The relative growth in importance of bank deposits as compared with banknote issues must not blind us to the fact that the decline of the latter is chiefly due to their being crowded out by government note issues.

As between the gold certificate and the greenback of large denominations, the provisions of the Currency Act indicate that its framers feared that the former would tend to supplant the latter and would eventually be the only form of note used in the circulation or at least desired for making large payments. It is a question whether such a development should not be encouraged. But the Currency Act stands in the way with its provision to stop the issue of gold certificates when the gold in the Reserve Fund of the Treasury falls below one hundred millions, or when the greenbacks and silver certificates in the General Fund exceed sixty millions. In this particular the Currency Act is far from solving the currency problem. A succession of active business years may postpone the necessity of reopening the question. But difficulties will inevitably arise, until we have finally disposed of that question by cancelling the greenbacks, which, however, we seem unable to do except at times of abundant government revenue, when the necessity for the step is not apparent. Then will be the time to attack the further question whether a "limping double standard" is a desirable permanent currency arrangement. Germany has recently answered the question by taking steps to withdraw the Thalers from circulation and eventually substitute silver token coins for them.

The significance of the recent strike in the anthracite coal regions lies not in the fact that the miners have gained an advance of 10 per cent. in wages and secured the abolition of the sliding scale and some other causes of dissatisfaction. Our experience

with strikes in the past, as condensed in the elaborate investigations of the Department of Labor, shows that in periods of rising prices and commercial activity the chances are strongly in favor of people who strike for an advance. We are obviously living in such a period at the present day. The latest statistics of wages collected by the Department of Labor show that, if the average wages in 1891 be represented by one hundred, they would have been represented by 97.88 in 1895. From that point there has been a steady advance, the figures for the succeeding years being as follows:

[blocks in formation]

Under such favorable conditions, both of general wages and of general business, it is not surprising that sooner or later the miners should have gained a victory, especially when aided by the political pressure which the impending presidential election brought to their support.

The significant and gratifying feature of the contest is that it should have been conducted in such an orderly manner and with practically no violence. When we recall the Pittsburgh riots of 1877, with the destruction of property and life which they involved; when we recall the Homestead strike of 1892, with its pitched battle between Pinkerton detectives and strikers, the fear was natural that the outbreak of a strike involving 140,000 men, largely of foreign birth and of races which are not noted for their peaceful character, would lead to similar excesses. The outcome of the strike shows that the trades unions are mak

ing progress in our country, that organization is bringing with it, in spite of numerous lapses, a higher degree of responsibility and more skilled leadership. The outcome also indicates progress on the part of the operators, for any ill-considered attempt on their part to refuse to consider the demands of the men, any obstinate insistence upon the right to do as they pleased with their own, might easily have provoked bloodshed, and added to the losses which any such cessation of labor involves.

Every such evidence of progress in self-restraint brings us nearer to the solution of the great question, "What is to be the future organization of society?" There are a good many people in our country who look forward to the introduction of some form of socialism in order to do away with the constantly recurring strife between labor and capital, and with the irregularities and uncertainties of capitalistic production. In Germany the number is much larger, and the Socialist party already boasts of the largest constituency of any single political party in the empire. Yet there is much evidence for the belief that socialism of the orthodox type has already seen its best days. This belief is confirmed by a suggestive brochure recently issued by Prof. Sombart, of Breslau, under the title "Dennoch." The author is one of the ablest of the younger German economists, and is probably as well acquainted with the history of socialistic thought as any man in the country. In this publication, in which he reviews the history of trades unionism in England and in Germany, he reaches the conclusion that the German unions are gradually coming to occupy the position which the English unions have had for many years, and that they are in reality the greatest obstacles to socialism. The industrial organization of the future, according to him, will neither be capitalism, pure and simple, nor yet socialism. There will be an extension of coöperative production and of public industries, but we shall still look for progress, especially in developing new countries, to the enterprise of capitalists. The prevalence of the "Weltpolitik” which is so typical of modern times will confine purely socialistic enterprises to a narrow field. But hand in hand with improvements in the processes of production will go an improvement in the condition of the working classes, aided by social legislation and by strong organizations. The best test of the strength of any labor organization is its ability to hold in check its own members.

A

THE ALLEGED FAILURE OF DEMOCRACY.

N experience common to all progressive social movements has begun to show itself in connection with democratic institutions-the feeling that actual results are less decisive and complete than those which we had a right to anticipate. A forward movement owes its impulse largely to the relatively excessive importance attached to it; and when the discovery is made that much more remains to be done, that the things involved in progress are innumerable and constantly on the increase, and that what has been accomplished may even prove mischievous unless it is at once supported by its proper accessories, the feeling of disappointment becomes acute and inclines many minds to retreat to an earlier position. This breadth and this complexity of consequences involved in progress, this necessity for further effort, are nowhere more conspicuous than in connection with democratic institutions; and these institutions, therefore, least of all promise an immediate millennium. The friends of a free government are not prepared for this discovery, and the enemies of a free government rejoice in it as a confirmation of previous belief. The results of free institutions in our country and elsewhere for the last thirty years have given occasion quite widely for this double sense of failure and of mistake.

It has recently gained expression in two works especially worthy of attention, "Democracy and Liberty," by W. E. H. Lecky, and "First Principles in Politics," by W. S. Lilly. The first is written from a practical standpoint and is the fruit of wide observation; the second is an attack on the theory of democracy as in itself irrational. Lecky dwells chiefly on the evils that have appeared in connection with democracy and to which it is from its very nature exposed. These strictures are, for the most part, just, and serve the needful purpose of admonition. They are depressing chiefly by their painful accumulation, by the few compensatory considerations offered, and by a somewhat insufficient recognition of the inevitable difficulties which attend on the formation of adequate civic institutions. A por

« PrejšnjaNaprej »