Wealthy Capital and Credit. 51 



country; if the engagement were annulled the country would be 

 neither poorer nor richer. The mortgagee would have lost a 

 thousand pounds, and the owner of the land would have gained 

 it. Speaking nationally, the mortgage was not itself wealth, bun 

 merely gave A a claim to a portion of the wealth of B. It was 

 wealth to A, and wealth which he could transfer to a third per- 

 son, but" — and here comes in a saving clause which contains the 

 essence of the whole matter — "that which he so transferred was 

 a joint ownership, to the extent of a thousand pounds, in the land 

 of which B was nominally sole proprietor." The public funds 

 of a country are in precisely the same category. Mr. Mill says 

 they cannot be counted as part of the national wealth, but inti- 

 mates in one breath that they are a part ot individual wealth, and 

 in the next wipes out the distinction. They are not real wealth 

 at all, neither national nor individual. The fundholders are 

 "mortgagees on the general wealth of the country;" the funds 

 indicate liens upon that which is real and tangible, to be drawn 

 ultimately from the tax payers of the nation. Mr. Mill also gives 

 countenance to a distincton between the wealth of a nation and 

 that of mankind. " A country," he says, " may include in its 

 wealth all stock held by its citizens in the funds of foreign coun- 

 tries, and other debts due to them from abroad." But, as if not 

 quite satisfied with this statement, he adds, "even this is only 

 wealth to them by being a part ownership in wealth held by 

 others. It forms no part of the wealth of the human race." 



There is in reality no distinction between the wealth of an in- 

 dividual, of a nation and of mankind. Individual wealth is and 

 must be a part of national wealth, and national wealth is and must 

 be a part of the wealth of the human race. If the context were 

 always carefully read in explanation of the text, Mill might per- 

 haps be safely allowed to answer Mill. As it is, his insufficiently 

 guarded words at this point have helped to perpetuate the thou- 

 sand and one fallacies which find expression in discussions about 

 currency, banking and taxation. 



Professor Perry has taken his stand without qualification on 

 the economic theory that credits, rights, claims are property, 

 meaning by property wealth or capital. The term property is an 



