conform to the principle of this prohibition.[1] But with our variable yardstick of commerce, observance of the constitutional provision, at best, conforms only to the letter, not the spirit, because the letter of the contract, through the law, fixes the obligation in gold by weight, whereas the contracting parties are not properly concerned with what a gold dollar weighs; usually, in fact, they do not even know that a dollar is a weight-unit. The meeting of their minds is essentially on the basis of what a dollar is worth—that is, of what it will do for them in commerce; and they can make little or no allowance for any change in that worth.
Thus, under the very protection of the constitutional provision mentioned, one of the parties to the contract always does rob the other to some extent. This social pocket-picking, unconscious but real, would cease, if our monetary yardstick were regulated; and with it would cease also discontent, jealousy, and suspicion, in so far as these grow out of that species of social injustice. Crises and depressions of trade would be reduced in intensity, if not rendered impossible, and the fundamental reason for much unsound speculation would be taken away.
Business, now periodically disturbed by the pranks of our mischievous dollar, would be put on a foundation more secure than ever before because the greatest and most universal uncertainty or gamble, all the more disastrous because unseen—the gamble in gold—would be removed.
- ↑ With certain exceptions, such as bankruptcy laws for extraordinary cases. In this connection, see Appendix I, §6.
