The times. [volume] (Richmond, Va.) 1890-1903, 1894-12-29
A CORRESPONDENT TAKES ISSUE
WITH Us.

We have on different occasions given
a good deal Of space to "A discussion OF the
questions raised by Mr. j. X. Miller nj
his letter published elsewhere this morn
ing but they are the important ques-
tions for present solution, and we feel
entirely Justified therefore. in giving still
more space TO them, and IN renewing the
discussion OF them whenever they come
up until the people not only understand
them. but understand them correctly.
The main point at issue between Mr..
Miller and The Times is whether or not
prices Of commodities depend upon the
quantity of money. We admit that there
must be certain quantity OF money for
prices Of commodities to attain to their
normal condition. but when that quantity
exists We submit that an addition TO the
quantity cannot affect the prices of COM
modites. though it causes commodities
to speak language in their prices which
means that money has deteriorated in
value.
We submit this proposition with entire
confidence Notwithstanding the many
opinions which have been expressed to
the contrary.
We repeat our concession that there
must be in every country certain guam
tity of money or prices will not stand
at those relative figures which are nor
NAL. But when that quantity of money
exists there is no need for any more, and
II an increase of it takes place and prices
Tigp no II ic on exrf1 hat ba
has deprecated in purchasing power and
not that the articles have increased in
value. The proof positive OF this Is that
If a bushel Of wheat exchanged before the
increase of money for two bushels Of
corn, it will not exchange after the in
crease OF money and consequent rise in
the price of wheat for any more corn.
When the increase of money takes place
it makes everything else rise i'm price
ratably with wheat. so that the exchange
able values Of commodities remain exact
~ where they were before. We submit
then. that this is proof positive that
money has So increased in quantity that
men have come to set less value upon
it, and it is evidence that money has
therefore, deprecated in value, aud not
that commodities have increased in value
The foundation Of the erroneous opin-
ion upon this subject is the almost uni
versal idea that business consists of the
transaction which We call purchase and
sale. But an inhnitesimally small pro-
portion of the transactions OF business
are purchases and sales. The overwhelm-
Ing bulk of them are exchanges of com
modities. though the great buH of these
80 through the forms Of purchase and
sale. But they are not purchases and
sales except in form. They are at bottom
exchanges of commodities.
When a housekeeper goes to a grocer
and buys molasses and bacon, we may, for
the present consider that transaction as
no more than a purchase for money. to
the completion of which money is neces-
sary. But when a planter sells his crop
Of tobacco on the Tobacco Exchange at
Richmond the affair is not a sale at all
No money is used IN it. The commission
merchant receives the purchasers check
on bank in payment for the tobacco
and TIE purchaser has no money at all
IN tn, bank. lie has a credit there which
Is backed by his visible and tangible
property only. The commission merchant
deposits this check in his bank and the
credit is transferred from the purchaser
Of the tobacco 10 himself. and no money
has been used yet. The commission mcr-
chant then sends his check on this credit
10 the planter, and the credit is trans
fcrred from the commission merchant to
the planter. The planter then buys the
supplies Of meat and cloth which he needs
and gives checks to the sellers of these
articles, and the credit Is transferred
from him to them. Now. the whole of
this transaction is that some tobacco has
been snapped for some meat and cloth.
IL could have been done by the raiser
OF meat and the fuller of cloth going di-
rectly 10 the tobacco planter and making
the swaps. But neither knew the needs
OF the other. and they did not know.
therefore how TO get into communication
with each other. Both. therefore. went
10 the exchanges Of business, where men
make their living by bringing such par
ties into communication with each other,
and the exchanges were effected through
formal sales which were not sales at all.
We should like TO know how the quantity
o. money In existence could have affected
the question how much tobacco that
planter was going 10 give for y pound
OF meat or yard OF cloth?
But we come back 10 the concession
with which we started this article. A
certain quantity of money is undoubtedly
nscssssry to prices being adjusted upon