Wealth, Gajnial and Credit 47 



The subject to whicb I desire to call attention chiefly at this 

 time is credit, but before doing so, it is important to pass in bri^f 

 review two or three other terms which lead up to and are neces- 

 sarily involved in any discussion of credit. 



The first of these is value, an imjiortant term in Poliical Econ- 

 omy, and one almost necessirily concerned in every eroni)rai>-al 

 discus>ion. A misapprehension of the nature of value will vitiate 

 all reasoning upon ques'ions of economy and finan -e. The term 

 is a rrlative one, ami herein lies the chief difficulty. That which 

 is absolute the mind can seize and hoM, but mere relations are 

 apt to slip the grasp at every turn. Vilue alwiys implies a co.n- 

 parison. It is the relation which one thing bears to another as 

 mafie known by an act of free exchange. In other words, ex- 

 change, which is a sort of equalizing of estimates, alone gives ex- 

 pression to value. It would be just as reasonable to attempt to 

 determine a ratio by considering one of its terms only, as to at- 

 tempt to ascc'taia the value of a thing without comparing it with 

 something else. 



Another term closely allied to value, and which is made the cen- 

 tral word in most of the definitions of political economy, is wealth. 

 Thi^, also, like other terms which this science is compc'led to use, 

 is taken from every day language, and is sometimes employed in 

 a vague, and often in a metapho'ical sense. " E/ery one," says J. 

 S. Mill, " has a notion, sufficiently correct for common purposes, of 

 what is meant by wealth. The inquiries which relate to it are in 

 no danger of being confounded with those relating to any other of 

 the great human interests" While this is true, yet, as Mill him- 

 self t>hows, the most misL-hievous confusion of ideis his existed 

 upon the subject, which for generations gave a th Tonghly false 

 direction to the whole policy of Europe. Under the so calh d 

 "Me cantile System," nations in their intercourse with eachoher 

 assumed, either expressly or tacitly, that money an I the f)reci')us 

 metals capable of being converted directly into money were alone 

 wealth — that whatever sent the<e out of a country impoverished 

 it, whatever tended to heap them up in a country ad<led to its 

 wealth, no matter what or how much of ether commodities was 

 given in exchange for them. These crude notions have in the 



