Weekly Chillicothe crisis. (Chillicothe, Livingston Co., Mo.) 1878-19??, 1880-11-11
THE PURPOSE OF MONEY.
Its Uses and Values--The Effect It Has
on the Welfare of Mankind--The
Meaning Of the Term Money.

p. A. Booker, In h' Nttotal View.
Any public institution evolved by the
growing wants of society, tested by a
thorough experience and submitted
then to an exhaustive investigation,
must stand or fall with the result.
Like any other human institution,
that of money can only be studied or
treated intelligently or eifectually by
asking and determining the questions
What is money for? Of what does it
consist? Whence should it emanate
How much is needed? We naturally
ask these questions respecting any other
human institutions or enterprise calcu-
lated to serve the wants of man. The
building of house, for instance, is
suggested for the purpose of sheltering
family from rain and sun. This pur-
pose suggests the most suitable material
required to serve that purpose. Where
that material is to come from, or from
what source it may justly ema-
nate, with due respect for the rights of
all parties owning such material, is the
third consideration. The quantity or
volume of such material which must
come out from that source to serve
this purpose is the fourth and cOnclud,
ing step to be taken in the enterprise of
building house. The same is true of
the institution of money; the purpose,
material, source and volume of money
cover the entire subject, and shall Ell
deavor to treat it briefly under these
four heads in four consecutive articles
in the National View, commencing
with that division of the subject which
heads the present article.
Were we entirely ignorant of any
system of trade or exchange or other
than barter, assuming that no such Il
thing as money had yet been resorted to
as Il medium of exchange, one would
naturally ask this first question: "What
is it for, or what purpose does it
seryey"
1t is now conceded by all respectable
authorities on political economy that
this instrument called money, of what
ever material it is made, if ii serve ef-
fectually the purpose of money, is
really money; or, as Prof. Francis a.
Walker, distinguished economist OF
of the metallic school, has more hand
somely expressed it: always and
everywhere, that which does the money
work is the moncy-thing." To deny
this position would he as absurd as tO
deny that an instrument which effect
ually served the purpose of shaving
was unworthy the name of razor, or to
deny that any other instrument is
is known by the service it performs.
The leading economists of the world
concur in defining money to be Il "me
dium Of exchange" But it incidentally
and necessarily performs two certain
functions in order to effect an exchange
or toserve the purposeo Of such medium
namely, it is first, an evidence of claim
second, measure of value.
1t is important first to remark that
there is nothing under the sun whicl
money can be the medium of eXchang
ing but human labor or service or the
proceeds thereof, which is property.
That money is an evidence of claim
against such labor or service, or proper
ty in market, is established by the fact
that in every instance the holder OF
money has first parted with either his
property, labor, or services before ht
gets possession Of the money. Then he
has first leldered an equivalent ser
vice on labor for the benefit of the
holder of property before he has any
just or valid claim against the property
by which he can obtain it from the
owner; and such valid claim in his
hands against such property is money
Whatever will purchase any kind Of
property, labor or human service, is
money, and the transaction is Il sale
but whatever is acquired by labor ol
service as the original blsis of owner
ship or claim is not money, but proper.
ty; and if given for other property OF
service the transaction is barter. II
the service of the physician he giver
for that of the blacksmith, or if corr
be given for bacon the transaction i,
barter; and likewise, if gold he giyer
for iron, both being the proceeds Of
labor and exchanged one for the other
the transaction is strictly barter.
Now, it must be remembered that
moneyis never party to barter trans
action because if it were it would bl
confounded with property, and money
10 At anrn tu lint IL, in sitt, ,at,t ~
exchanging property and service.
No one can fairly deny that all prop
erty is something of vital utility, some
thing that serves some necessity, com
fort or luxury of life. Money, in NJ
instance, ever serves such vital neCes
sity, comfort or luxury of itself. w,
neither eat, drink, wear or display il a,
vital necessity, comfort or luxur,
while it remains in the form of money
Gold is a vital luxury when used ~
jewelry; it gratiies the desire for orna
ment. When used as jewelry gold il
not, at the same time, used as money
but when the iewelry is wanted gold i
given for gold jewelry; or when none,
is more wanted than jewelry the latte
is given for money, and the transaction
is sale. But when gold jewelry is givel
for gold jewelry the transaction is bar
ter. Now, what glaring feature consti
tutes the real difference between tn
two transactions? It'll not the legalit
the government stamp upon the gol,
which lenders it current tender fo
debt incurred by purchasing iewelry.
But the government does not declar
all gold a current tender for payments
only such as it has stamped as money
Now what right has the government +
declare one mans gold a legal-tende
for another mans potatoes which h
has already consumed? Government
is simply stepping beyond its legitimat
domain, when it declares any certail
money property. 1t has no natural o
equitable right to pass any decree upol
the property of an individual, furthe
than to establish standard meas
ure of value, as dollar, franc
sovereign, ETC.; and the standar
measure of quantity in property, a
bushel, gallon, acre, etc. These meas
ures should not only be standard an
stable, but definite. The dollars shoul
express as definite an amount of valu,
and this amount of value should be q
Ill i \ IL 4