medium. But this result should not be brought about for a long time, measured by generations rather than by years. Certainly for a series of years international bimetallism, if adopted, would at least be not ineffective. No doubt all this is idle speculation, BO far as any political probabilities are concerned. International jealousy, and a sufficient satisfaction in most countries with the existing state of things, make such an agreement impracticable. But this does not answer the question of principle, or show that the wider use of silver is restricted by any natural law. Doubts as to the expediency of the change and unwillingness to enter on hazardous legislation are the serious sources of difficulty for those who demand a free use of silver for currency.
The real question for the future of silver, then, is one of the expediency and possibility of legislation. It may be freely admitted that if legislation were different, the silver situation would be essentially different. And ultimately legislation will doubtless respond to the pressure of expediency. If it should appear that the exclusive use of gold works ill, that the failure to use silver causes mischief, and that the wider use of silver would make things better, we may expect that eventually the civilized countries, either by international agreement or by separate legislation, will retrace their steps and endeavor to secure the use of both metals. The fundamental question of expediency, again, is one as to the stability of prices and incomes. If under the gold standard there is a steady tendency toward lower prices and lower money incomes, and if such a decline works evil, there is ground for demanding a change. If, on the whole, the disuse of silver is accompanied by no mischievous changes, things may remain, and in all probability will remain, as they are.
So far as the experience of the past is concerned, it is not to be questioned that in fact there has been a general decline in prices since the date, roughly speaking, when silver began to be discarded and gold became the sole basis of the medium of exchange. The year 1873 brings at once the high-water mark of general prices and the beginning of the demonetization of silver. During the last twenty years wholesale prices and retail prices have steadily pressed downward. So far there is a prima-facie case for the proposition that it is gold that has appreciated rather than silver that has depreciated. But another equally striking and unquestionable phenomenon of the last twenty years has been that the money incomes of all classes of society have not gone down, but have rather tended upward. Such a movement, combined with the movement for lower prices, simply means that material prosperity has increased on all hands, that our income in terms of commodities is growing, and that men are getting more in return for their labor. Moreover, it is not to be
