Watertown republican. [volume] (Watertown, Wis.) 1860-1906, 1896-07-22
Whaf is Money!

exchange in financial transactions be-
tween citizens and with the govern
ment. 2. Any written or stamped
promise payable in standard coined
money and lawfully current in lieu of
it. 3. Wealth, property.
Saws Walker: Money is that which
passes freely from hand to hand
throughout the community in final
discharge of debts and full payment
for commodities, being accepted
equally without reference to the char
acter or credit of the person who
offers it, and without the intention OF
the person who receives it to consume
it, on enjoy it, or apply it to any other
use than, in turn, to tender it to
others in discharge of debts or pay
ment for commodities.
Says Fawcett: /. Money serves as
a measure of value. 2. Money is a
universal medium of exchange.
Says Jevons: Money acts as a
measure of value, as a medium Of ex-
change, as a standard of value, and
as store of values.
If we adopt the definition of Faw
cett as the most generally accepted
one we shall not be far out Of the way.
While less comprehensive than others,
: is clear, concise and practical.
What are the functions and laws Of
mo- y?
ke.ore we proceed to investigate
this question, let us endeavOr to guard
against certain misconceptions and
errors to which the discussion of this
subject is peculiarly liable. These
errors arise largely from the unfor-
tunate necessity OF using as techni-
cal terms words and phrases which
are in popular use. People are apt to
think that they understand the sub
feet because they are familiar with the
terms used in the discussion of it, and
thus fundamental errors creep in which
must be removed before there can be
any perfect comprehension of the ma
ture and functions Of money.
The frstAOf these is the error which
led TO those absurd notions which
were at the foundation of the so-called
Mercantile SYSTEM Of Europe, viz. ::
The mistake OF supposing that money IS
tUeaHh in some peculiar sense in which
other things are not 1CeGlth; that money
is an end and not means. This errone-
Gus idea for a long period controlled
the commercial policy of the civilized
world, and has been the most Obsti
nately persistent error III the history of
the subject. 1t has even been declared
| by competent authority thatfew among
| political economists are wholly free
| Theory of Wealth" Probably every
country of Europe has, at one time or
another tried to give practical effect
to this theory by legislation against
the export of money. Kings and par
| liaments have sought to increase the
stock Of money in their respective
countries not only by prohibiting the
| export of gold and silver, but also by
decreeing that every merchant on the
| high seas should import certain
amount of coin or bullion in every
! ship, proportional to the value of his
other goods, and spend it all, together
with the money received for his i'm
ports, IN buying goods in that coun-
try. The penalty for violation of such
laws was, not infrequently, death.
| Such extreme measures could only be
made possible on the supposition that
money is wealth par excellence that
money is an end. Now, as Macaulay
would say, every school-boy knows
money IS means and IS not an end:
that II is good for something, not good
per Sc; that money itself cannot feed
US nor clOthe us nor house US, nor in
any way minister to ourcOmfort or hap
piness; but, that the things which
money will bringin exchange can do all
these things, and so be that we secure
tlessreal objects of our desire, we care
not who takes Cur money in exchange
for them, nor what he does with that
money, even though he should choose
to sink it in the deep, deep sea.
The term money is used as a syno-
nym for wealth. All property, all
income, all expenditure are estimated
and expressed in money. If a person
| Id lIlCICdS1IS LII WOt1UA - Sdy nS 10
making money, or if decreasing in
wealth we say he is losing money.
Now, money is wealth in the same
sense that other things of value are
wealth, and in no other sense. It is
valuable on account of its uses, and
those uses are clearly defined. True,
it is the one form of wealth which all
men are at all times willing to receive,
and the one form which can be at
once exchanged for any commodity on
the market, but this is merely a pecu-
liarity, and is involved in it's fitness
for use as an instrument of exchange
1t is not true, however, that men de-
sire an unlimited quantity of it. They
may desire an unlimited quantity of
wealth, but under our present eco
nomic system, no man desires more
money than is sufficient for his present
needs. Business men keep only enough
money by them to meet cash demands.
The larger the business the smaller
the proportion of cash in hand. There
is very good reason for this in the
| fact that idle money is I1nnrOdnctiUa