"The objection to independent bimetallism is that the parity between the two metals cannot be maintained at our ratio of 16 to 1. That is—the gold (23.2 grains) in the gold dollar will be worth more than the silver (371¼ grains) in the silver dollar. We have twice changed the quantity of gold in the gold dollar; each time making it less. If the commercial value of 23.2 grains of gold is more than the commercial value of 371¼ grains of silver, then reduce it to 22, 21, 20 grains or less if necessary to put the two at a ratio, where the practical effect of free coinage, when once set to working again, will demonstrate that the ratio is at its natural point, and parity easily obtained. Reducing the gold in the gold dollar would leave gold for more dollars, and this would assist in establishing rising prices as it would multiply the number of dollars. The weight of the silver dollar should not be changed. Its integrity should be preserved as originally fixed.
"There can be no objection to this plan, for as we have seen the parity of the two metals was maintained for hundreds of years. The bimetallists do not believe that the ratio has much influence. They believe that the influence of unlimited free coinage is so great in establishing the commercial parity of the two metals, that any ratio near the natural ratio of 1 to 15⅔ will give satisfaction.
"In this controversy, one point should never be lost sight of, and that is, that higher prices—bimetallic prices—will come with remonetization of silver, even though gold goes to a premium.
"It is a fixed law in the science of money that when both metals are primary money—whether at the time seeking the mints or not, and whether in circulation or not—bimetallic prices prevail.
