THE CURRENCY. 19 



for the farmer benefits the community as well as himself, while 

 every dollar made by the usurer Is a dollar taken from the pocket 

 of some other individual, since the usurer cultivates nothing but an 

 actual obstruction. 



THE MONOPOLY OF THK CURRENCY. 



The exigencies of our exposition render it necessary that we 

 should state here three distinct points, as a basis for certain re- 

 marks that we propose to submit to the reader: 



1. Let us suppose, in order to make a thorough estimate of the 

 amount of money circulating in Massachusetts, that each individ- 

 ual in the state — man, woman, or child — posesses $10 in specie, or in 

 the bills of specie-paying banks. The population of the state was, 

 in the year 1850. about 1.000,000. Our estimate will give us, there- 

 fore, about $10,000,000 as the total amount of the circulating medi- 

 um of the state. This is perhaps a very extravagant supposition: 

 but we desire to make a high estimate, as the greater the amount 

 of the circulating medium, the less will be the force of our objec- 

 tions against the existing currency. Now, since children seldom 

 control any money, our hypothesis apportions to each fall-grown 

 person an average of $30 — for the children constitute at least one- 

 half of the community; and since women, who constitute one-half 

 of the grown population, generally leave their money with their 

 husbands or fathers, it apportions to each full-grown man an aver- 

 age of $40. We feel confident that the reader will confess, after 

 consulting his pocket-book, that our estimate marks as high as the 

 circumstances of the case will warrant. But to be certain that we 

 do not fall below the truth, let us double the total sum and say that 

 the amount of money circulating in Massachusetts is, on an aver- 

 age. $20.(X)0.000. This is our first point. 



2. The valuation of the taxable property existing in the state 

 of Massachusetts, was, for the year IS.'SO, about $()00,000.000— or an 

 average of about $600 for every man, woman and child in the state: 

 or an average of about $2,400 for every family of four persons — no 

 contemptiiile fortune for a workingmanl Now, every person of 

 ordinary observation will recognize that this valuation is too high. 

 We are willing to confess that the wealth of the state is unjustly 

 distributed; but we are not willing to confess that the distribution 

 is of the absolutely flagrant character indicated by the valuation: 

 for if a man posessing a, more average amount of wealth, owns prop- 

 erty to the value of $()00 and a like amount in addition for his wife 

 and for each of his children, where is the immense mass of wealth 

 which the average would apportion to those who actually own loss 

 than $600; yes, to those who actually own nothing? We conceive 

 that it is not altogether impossible to penetrate the motives which 

 induced the Valuation Committee to mark the wealth of the State 

 as high as $6(K),(X)0,000. Indeed we may take occasion as we proceed 

 with our observations to indicate those motives. But let us grant. 



