The Kinsley graphic. [volume] (Kinsley, Kan.) 1890-1940, 1895-11-01
FACTS AND FALLAclEs.

Money Does Not measure Values but Slm-
ply Expresses Thorn In Monetary Terms.
Mr.. Thomas Hitchcock the financial
editor of the Sun. has as many financial
fallacies sticking to him as there are
cockleburs in q sleeps tail. He says,
for instance, that money is the meas.
ure of value, though it is doubtful if
he could tell us what value is. 1t is q
quality so subtle and elusive, appear
ing and disappearing, that a ,satisfac-
tory definition of it has never been
made. 1t is as hard to catch and hold
as the vagaries of the human mind.
We can send little child to the
store across a street for pint of mo.
lasses, and have the means of finding
out If the transaction has been fair
one. for there is the pint cup at hand.
If money were the measure of value,
we could give the same child $50 or 500
to buy horse, with the same certainty
that we would get value received. Any:
body would be willing to send a child
for pint of molasses, but who would
be willing to send a child to buy $50
or 500 horse? And vet, if money
were the measure of value, one trans.
action would be as safe and as simple
as the other.
Modern economists have entirely dis.
carded the fallacy that Mr.. Hitchcock
brings to the front again Money is
not the measure of value, but the ex.
preston of value. Value cannot be
measured, but it can be and is .x-
pressed in terms. We should have
value if money were abolished to-mor-
row, but the terms of expression would
change. We should have value. out
prices would disappear.
AS all fallacies are futile in tn Elk
very nature, it is hardly worth while
dealing seriously with this belated one
that Mr.. Hitchcock thrusts into the
discussion. Like intrinsic" value,
the moment the mind is focused on it,
that moment it resolves itself into its
original vapor.
But the financial editor of the Sun Is
not wrong in all his conclusions He
deals somewhat sarcastically with tie
idea that. because the government is
sues demand notes or bills of credit, Il
is engaged in the banking business.
We often hear it said by some banker,
who is not any too we'll versed IA
economics, that the treasury notes
should be retired SO that the govern
ment may ''go out of the bankips
business" How few bankers there are
who are ignorant of the fact that the
issue of notes is, properly speaking,
no part of the banking business! 1t is
a function that has been engrafted
upon the banks, but it does not prop.
erly belong to them. 1t is the business
of banks to receive money for deposit,
to loan money and to discount notes.
When the government issues its treas
ury notes, it is no more engaged in the
banking business than when it is bor-
rowing money by issuing bonds. In
one case it borrows money and pays
no interest on it, and in the other it
borrows money and pays interest. How
can these transactions be called bank
ing?" Only men who are decidedly ig-
norant could confuse the banking bust.
ness with the issue of notes.
All this talk about the government
going out of the banking business is
INDUCED in by men who have purely
selfish ends in view. They want the
government notes retired so that the
banks may issue the notes instead and
thus have an opportunity of manipu-
lating the currency to suit their own
purposes. But even as it is, they want
the government to sretain supervision
of the banks and to lend them its
credit
. 1t is a beautiful scheme altogether,
and Mr.. Hitchcock touches it up with
the proper amount of ridicule. We
may add that there is no banker now
living who will see the greenbacks
and treasury notes retired. -Atlanta
Constitution.