The progressive farmer. [volume] (Winston, N.C.) 1886-1904, 1891-04-07
WHAT IS MONEY!

Money has been defined as being the
medium of exchange, and as being the
measure of values. Both these defini-
tions seem to be inadequate, if not
positively defective. Money is not the
medium of exchange in any exclusive
sense. Other things are as much the
media of exchange as is money.
Money is not the measure of values.
For the values of the world would then
be no greater than the amount of
money in the world. Such a state
ment would be plainly absurd. Some
other definition for money must be
found.
Anything to be money must be a
amount, and it must be easily portable.
By a persistent value, we mean a
value that is undestructible by the &C
cidents of life and the vicissitudes of
government. If money has not this
quality of persistent value, it will not
serve useful purposes. For a wise
man will not part with values which
he has created, II come into possession
of, unless the thing called money
which he takes in exchange for them
has a value that will not be destroyed.
If the supply of any material which
we seek to clOthe with the functions of
money is such as to make the speedy
increase of the amount of such mate
rial possible, it will not do for use as
money, because the speedy increase of
such supply will lessen the power of
the money already in the hands of the
people to minister to their necessities,
and they will not take it to acid
against the time of their need.
If anything we seek to use as money
has not the quality of easy portability,
it will not be used as money, for the
reason that it cannot be taken from
place to place without loss.
Keeping in mind what has been
written above, we may now advance
to what may seem to be a satisfactory
definition of money, viz:
Money is the exact measur of the
power which the inhabitants of the
world have in their hands to supply
themselves with the things which they
need or desire, and which they them
selves do not, or cannot, produce by
their own labor.
If every person produced by his own
tabor all the things that he needed and
desired, it is obvious that there would
be no such thing as money. Money is,
therefore, the direct and necessary re-
sultant of the division of labor.
If the foregoing reasoning be valid,
it will be easily seen that any economic
system which tends to put the money
of the world into the hands of a few
people, will inevitably make slaves of
many people. The concentration of
the business of exchange in a few
great cities tends powerfully to the
consolidation of wealth in the hands
of a few men. 1t is not more certain
that every drop of blood in a mans
veins tends back to his heart, than it
is that every dollar of money in this
country tends toward New York.
To prevent the consolidation of
wealth in the hands of few people,
several things are necessary.
First, the amour of money in circu-
lation must be great enough to make
the business of exchange easy. The
amount of money that will make the
business of exchange easy must be as
certained by a careful study of the
questions involved, and by the applica-
ton to the problem of carefuny-tested
experience. Great 1nanciers, s. called,
are not competent to make these
studies. For they are interested in in
creasing or diminishing the amount of
money 80 as to enable them to control
it in their own interest.
Second, when the amount of money
has been ascertained for the need of
one period, the rate of increase of it's
amount must not be greater than the
rate of increase in the business of ex-
change. A greater rate of increase of
the amount of money than that we
have indicated, will operate to lessen
the power, of which money in the
hands of the people is the measure to
supply themselves with the things