The independent., 1903-04-09
Money and the Taxing Power
BY w. FL. ASHBY.

The same remarks apply in all re-
lspects to the corn in the above Guo-
tation, except the difference in the
numerals used.
Now, the object in view among men,
and which stands in need of "facili-
tation," is to exchange these two
commodities for each other, and not
necessarily to exchange one of them
for coin and then exchange the coin
for the other.
An inspection of the above market
report shows that the quantity Of val
ue of one bushel Of wheat, as ex-
pressed by the symbol and numerals
constituting money. is $0.66 2-3. which
expression is the price of one bushel
of wheat; and that the quantity of
value of one bushel of corn, as ex-
pressed in money, is $0.13 Is, which
expression is the price" of one bushel
of corn. There are no such coins,
and therefore their price is not a
coin, but an expression. :E
Now, does this facilitate or make
easy the exchange Of wheat and corn
for each other? Manifestly it does
The unit of quantity of both wheat
and corn is the bushel, so that the
quantity Of each commodity may be
obtained by weight or measurement
The quantity of the force of demand
for one bushel of wheat (the ap-
praisal or valuation" of which is it's
quantity Of value) is expressed by the
same price" as is the quantity of
xyol Ina <f ho1r re u,
quantity of value Of five bushels of
corn is, therefore, equal to the guam
tity of value of one bushel of wheat,
because their price" is identical. One
bushel of wheat, therefore, is the
exchange equivalent of five bushels
of corn.
Upon the basis of one bushel of
wheat for five bushels of corn, any
desired quantity of the one commod-
ity may be exchanged for the other,
without any necessity whatever for
coin. Thus it is made clear that the
device called money" in the entire
absence of ''coin," does facilitate or
render easy the exchange of commod
tiles for each other. Coin, it is thus
commodities for each other.
Not only is this true, but coin can
not enter in any way into the ex-
change of one commodity for another
commodity, upon the above condi-
tions of a bushel of wheat for the
five bushels of corn. There is no
coin nor any combinations of coins
among us that can be exchanged for
the five bushels of corn or the one
bushel of wheat.
The crude thought, suggested by the
authorities, is that coin facilitates
exchanges of wheat for corn, by be-
ing itself first received in exchange
for wheat and then in turn exchanged
for corn. But in the case supposed
coin cannot be given in exchange for
either five bushels of corn or one
bushel Of wheat, for the reason that
no coin of the proper price" exists.
Coin, therefore, in this case is power
less to facilitate the exchange, while
we have seen that the money symbol
without any coin can do So And if in
one instance this is true, it destroys
the false theory that coin facilitates
exchanges.
1t is granted that coin could be
manufactured that would fit the sup
posed case; but countless multitude
of other cases must arise and do arise
every day, where the proper change
cannot be had and it is not possible
| to fabricate coin able to meet every
contingency. Moreover we see that
the device Of "a money" without
"coin," does of itself and in every
case facilitate exchanges; while in the
case supposed, coin utterly fails to
| take part.
| On the other hand, no case can
possibly arise in which the symbol
and numerals, which constitute our
money would not overcome the diff
ficulty and render the exchange easy.
AS the ayoWed purpose is to facili-
tate the exchange Of commodities for
each other-and not to exchange COM
IImodities for coin-it is perfectly per
tinent to ask why it is thought desir-
able to introduce the third commod-
ity, coin, into the transaction, when
the money symbol and numerals do
alone facilitate exchanges" without
any coin; and when coin is seea to
| bp roUarIecs ta rpnder aOV cervirc in