More Money In Circulation

If there was any actual relation be tween the quantity of money in circulation and national prosperity, we would now be on a flood tide. For more. than a twelvemonth now the amount of money in circmlation in the United States has been steadily on the increase. Jnly 1, 1896, about the time the Chicago platform was in the process of incubation and the mouth of the popocrat was full of demands for more of the circulating medium, the total money in circnlation in the United States was $1,509,725,200, making $21. 15 per capita on an estimated population of 71,390,000. Nov. 1, 1896, on the eve of the election, when the people of the United j States were to give their verdict against i a debased and depreciated currency, the mouey in circnlation was $1,627,055,614, making 522.63 per capita on an estimated population of 71,902,000. March 1, 1897, on the eve of McKinley's inauguration, the total money in circnlation in the United States had risen to the unprecedented sum of $1,675,694,953, makiug 23.14 per capita on an estimated population of 72,418,000. To fully appreciate this increase of the money in circulation in the United States it is only necessary to say that in the last ten months it amounted to $165,969,753, or more than $2 per capita of the entire population. While the absolute circulation has passed all previous high water marks I the per capita circulation is still $1.30 below that of 1892, just before the panie. But the per capita is uow higher than it was in 1890 or any year in the history of the republic prior to that. Then why are the times not as good as they were along in the late eighties? Simply because good times depend on public confldence and industrial activity, and not on the amount of money in circulation. This is simply the teaching of the oíd proverb that a nimble sixpence is better than a slow shilling. -