The independent., 1903-04-16
Money and the Taxing Power
BY w. Fl. ASHBY.

a commodity" that becomes COM
mon denomination We cannot intel
ligently add together IL and 1-3 with
out possessing knowledge which de-
stroys Prof. Jeyons whole theory of
economics.
Only things which may be expressed
by the same term can be compared
with each other, and only things capa-
bic OF being compared with each 9TH
or, and expressssibie in g common term,
can be added together. Before we can
add together IL and 1-3, we must find
a common term through which both
are able TO speak; that is, we must
find common denominator."
Can any commodity be a common
term" for two ether commodities?
How is it possible for commodity to
become term? Such a statement.
when looked into, is too absurd for
serious discussion. One-half and one
third may be brought to common
denominator," as we perceive that l-2
is equal to Sc, and 1-3 is equal to &c.
We here express the quantity of each
in "sxths;" and perceive that the two
amount to five" "sixths, and that their
difference is 1-6.
But If we attempt to analyze Jey-
ons' illustration of a lump of silver
chosen as common commodity" as
he expresses it, the absurdity of the
thing becomes manifest. Why did he
say a pound" Of silver? He did not
know. Why did he not say pound
of gold?
The secret of his delusion is dis
closed when it is remembered that he
is an Englishman, with his mind sat
urated with ancient superstitions on
this subject, and that the term which
stands as the symbol of the fixed guam
tity OF value adopted as the standard
unit OF value, and which is the mon
ey'' OF England, is pound of silver"
Not a physical pound of silver; but
the term, "pound sterling" Had he
said ton of silver CT pound of gold.
1t seems that he must have perceived
the absurdity of what he wrote.
But when he says pound of sill
Ver,' it was for his English mind a
symbol merely, by which he ex-
pressed to himself, unconsciously, the
price OF quantity of corn; and look
ing at that price of flax, expressed by
the same term, he discovered what
quantity of fax would be of the same
price and perceived that to be the
quantity of flax which is the ex-
cnange equivalent Of the quantity of
corn which he assumed.
Corn and fax are not reducible t.
hox
ible to iron or wood. Neither corn
nor flax are capable of being reduced
to pounds sterling or to dollars"
They remain corn and flax through
out the process of exchange.
1t is not corn and fax that are
brought to common denominator."
1t is the quantity Of the force of de-
mand for each the estimation of which
what is called quantity of
value, that may be expressed by a
denominator, and which re-
quires expression. The corn and fax
are measured or weighed to determine
quantity. But equal quantities of corn
and flax by weight or measure are not
necessarily the exchange equivalents
Of each other.
When valuation" of the force of |
demand for each has been made. and |
the quantity of that valuation ex-
pressed in common term, aided by
that expression is the
price of each; and when the price
Of a fixed quantity of any two com
nodities is known, their exchange |
equivalence is at once manifest.
1t is not the two commodities that |
call for third commodity to act as a |
common denominator for them. It is
not the corn and flax that is trans
nuted into silver and thus finds a COM
mon form of expression as SILVER"
Corn and flax cannot by any known
be transmitted into silver:
hey remain corn and fax through
)ut the transactions.
But the quantity of the force of de-
nand for fixed quantity of each com
modify, when valued, is a differing
quantity of value fol each; and what
s required is not a commodity. but
symbol standing for fixed ouan-
,ity of abstract value, through which
o utter the quantity of the valuation
If each commodity. The symbol in
England is the pound of silver" used
not as the name of a metal, but as
The name of a fixed quantity of the
,orce of demand, which it symbolizes.