The independent., 1903-04-16

| ey, and now wishes his readers to
believe that the discovery was his
own. Del Mar did not blast it out;
he discovered it in the monetary his
tory of Greece and Rome; he did not
find it necessary to explore dark quar-
ries, with or without dynamite, but the
laws of the ancient republics. There
he found it and without more ado he
put it straightway into print for the
consideration of modern students.
Mr.. Ashby's view,s that money is an
institution" (of law), device" a
| mechanism" is not the only thing
taken from Del Mar; even the phras-
eology is copied. The very words will
be found in his works on Money and,
SO far as my reading goes, in no other
works. Chapter ". of Del Mars
Science of Money is even headed
Money is Mechanism"
OF course it may be mere coin
cidence that Mr.. Ashby should have
worked out the same idea; but, as
said last week, he never worked it
out of his own premises: for it has no
relation to them. The inference that
he pIagiarized it, is therefore very
strong Add to this that the phras-
eology is IDENTICAL and the plea of
coincidence will fall rather fiat.
AS Tor Mr.. Ashbys contention that
money was mot created for any other
purpose than making tax levies,
though | consider the assertion of no
consequence, one way or the other,
/ would recommend him, before max
ing it again, to study that very Aris-
totle whom he affects to SO much de-
splse. The StagyriLe was twenty-five
centuries nearer to the creation of
money than is Mr.. Ashby; and he evi-
IDENTIFY knew something about its or
igin. His account of the matter can
hardly be destitute of interest; and
may afford new impulse to the tt
tanic labors of the latter.
The economical theories which di-
vide the political parties of today are
to some extent the result Of differ
ences which arise from the meanings
attached to economical terms; and no
one is competent to discuss them who
is not at once thoroughly versed in
history and a master of style. In
neither of these respects do Mr.. Ash
by's writings commend themselves to
my admiration. On the contrary, Mr.
Del Mars familiarity with history ap-
pears in every page: while as to style,
his periods are both graceful and i'm
pressive. Nowhere in his works, for
| have studied them all with great at
tention, is there to be found the
slightest trace of egotism, or the least
discourtesy towards those from whom
he differs. If you would afford your
readers treat, you should reprint his
chapter ~. on Money is Mechan-
ism," or else chapter VI, contra Mac
Lead, to the bottom of page Is. There
is no calling of names there; yet Mac
Leod's theories aro handled with
severity that might furnish model
for Mr.. Ashby; especially when he is
writing for journals as widely read as
The Independent of Lincoln, Neb.
JAMES THEOBALD (PopulisD.
Hackensack, N. J.
(This phase of Mr.. Theobald's criti-
cism, the associate editor does not
care to discuss at this time, further
than to say that Mr.. Theobald, in one
instance at least, has singled out
word and assumed that Captain Ashby
applied it to the economists On the
other hand, it is a fact that calling
names is not argument; yet there are
times when it seems necessary in Or
der to arouse sufficient interest. Read
ers of The Independent will await with
interest the trial of Captain Ashby for
plagiarism. He has been accused. Let
him defend.-Associate Editor.)