March 24, 1905.] 



SCIENCE. 



449 



through the chain of incipient factors, be- 

 ginning with the farm on wliich the wheat 

 is pro.duced as the first step ; second, Chi- 

 cago as a wheat market; third, the baker; 

 fourth, the house of the consumer. The 

 productive process may be said to termi- 

 nate, temporarily, at any rate, in the house, 

 extending from the farm of the producer 

 to the house of the consumer. On the con- 

 trary, the societary process, or the mone- 

 tary flow, extends from the house of the 

 consumer back through the baker and 

 through the wheat market to the farm 

 where production began. These two cur- 

 rents represent an exact quantity, in the 

 one ease of goods, and in the other case of 

 money. They move in opposing direc- 

 tions, and in this respect are analogous to 

 the two opposing currents acting simul- 

 taneously, as represented in electrical 

 theory. 



There are various other causal factors to 

 be brought into the study of this relation, 

 including such factors as the mechanic, 

 who purchases from the hardware store, the 

 hardware store purchasing from the tool 

 factory, the tool shop purchasing from the 

 rolling mill, and the rolling mill from the 

 mine; but along each of those connections 

 the two currents, productive and circula- 

 tory, are in active operation, and all of 

 these factors are directly or indirectly con- 

 nected with another factor— the govern- 

 ment. 



This representation may seem at first 

 glance to be complicated by reason of the 

 numerous currents represented in the two- 

 fold process, the productive and the circu- 

 latory. Could the conclusions arrived at 

 in this method be put in such a form as to 

 have the community accept them? Eco- 

 nomic conclusions are not easily accepted 

 by the community in general. Why is this 

 so? One reason — possibly the main rea- 

 son—is that economists have failed to dis- 

 tinguish between means and ends. To the 



economist ends, rather than means, are im- 

 portant all the time. The economist, as a 

 rule, has laid so much emphasis on means as 

 to diffuse the sum total of impression made 

 upon the mind of the community. Never- 

 theless, the individual member of the com- 

 munity and the community as a whole are 

 interested in results, in ends, in income 

 rather than in outlay, but the income in 

 which they are interested is not the mone- 

 tary income, but real income. I may 

 illustrate this by supposing that in case of 

 our civil war, the policy of the northern 

 states toward the south had allowed ex- 

 ports to be made unhindered, but had pro- 

 hibited all imports except gold and silver. 

 What would the effect have been? The 

 great majority of people would at first 

 hand say that it would have enabled the 

 confederate states to command the control 

 of all utilities they desired, and thus 

 worked exactly contrary to the blockading 

 policy. But would that have been the 

 case? We see that it would not, as soon 

 as we realize that gold and silver are means 

 and not ends. If the prohibition of im- 

 ports of economic goods, except gold and 

 silver, had been carried out, the productive 

 process would have been interrupted and 

 the starving-out policy have gone on sub- 

 stantially as it did under the blockade. 

 This illustrates the relative importance of 

 the productive process as distinguished 

 from the monetary movement. 



^yorJ{ings of the Anthracite Coal Strike 

 Agreement. Wm. H. Taylor, St. Clair 

 Coal Company, Scranton, Pa. 

 This strike was inaugurated May 12, 

 1902. Five months later President Roose- 

 velt appointed the commission "to inquire 

 into, consider and pass upon the questions 

 in controversy in connection with the 

 strike in the anthracite region, and the 

 causes owt of which the controversies arose. 

 By the action you recommend, which the 



