Hutchinson gazette. [volume] (Hutchinson, Kan.) 1895-1902, 1895-08-08
1T IS ITS FUKCTION TAATMAKEs
MONEY.
Inter.MonntaIn Adrocata.

Inter-MOuntaln Advocate.
Any man who studies the question
Of money from on unprejudiced stand
point must conclude that it is the
function and not the intrinsic value
of the coin that gives it its utility
value,
Money has a function TO preform;
nothing else but money performs that
function. Anything that performs
that function is money. If it performs
that function well, it is good money.
Tit performs it honestly, it is honest
money.
The same is equally true of every
thing else. A man builds house.
Why does he build it? For the pur-
pose of protecting himself and family
from the ravages Of the elements the
rain, tie cold, and the heat. That is
the function Of the house. A house
that leaks, or whose walls do not re.
sist the cold and heat, would b.
worthless. 1t is the function the house
performs, and not the cost of material
entering into its construction, that
gives it its utility at all. ComUon
s9nse and business sagacity would
both favor building the house from the
cheapest material obtalnable, every
thing else being equal.
Mules are raised, fed, cared for
and sold, because there is a function
that they perform. That function is
the drawing of wagons and heavy loads
A mule is valuable according to his
ability to perform that peculiar func-
tiOn. Another mule Of equal size, age,
aud color might be practically worth
less by having been baked by an un-
wise teamster. The mule would be
there, but the function gone. His
utility value all disappears with the
disappearance of the function.
Again: The mule might he acct
dentally killed, He might weigh as
much dead as alive, and would be
but little older. Now, if the dead mule
could be used for drawing loads, the
same as when alive, then the dead
mule would be worth as much as a live
one. But our intrins c.value oddities
insist that the dead mule ought to be
worth as much as when enjoying the
best Of health, and their reasoning
leads them to the natural conclusion,
that, as dead mules are worthless,
therefore a mule is not a pro per ami
NAL to draw lOa is with.
Take another case: A man has a
ane bird-dOg. He hunts birds aud
points them out to his master. He Is
a valuble dog; not because he weighs a
certain number OF pounds, or because
he is young or nice-lOOking, but be-
cause he hunts birds. That Is his
function. All dogs do not possess it.
Take from him that function and he
becomes no more valuable than other
dogs. When that peculiar function
ceases in the dog he becomes worth
less. Any other dog possessing the
same function to the same degree of
utility would bs equally valuable.
But let the master accidently shoot
aud kill his dog, he becomes utterly
worthless, for with his life goes his
function. A dead dog cannot hunt
birds. But, our intrinsic-value frie.ds
insist that the deal dog should be
worth as much ground up into sausage
as he was for hunting birds, and,
therefore, as be will not sell for as
much in sausage as he would have sold
for as a hunter, such a dog is not good
for hunting birds, and, therefore, "A
man who uses the live dog for that
purpose is grossly dishonest.
Take one her sim le i,'ustratio ::