364 
DUTTON. 
command, upon the same conditions that prevail everywhere 
else. An equivalent must be given in exchange for it. But 
if they have already given all- that they are disposed to part 
with and still have not as much as they want, how are they 
to be benefited though the money of the world were in¬ 
creased tenfold ? 
Here the real nature of the complaint begins to show it¬ 
self. The economist has no difficulty in perceiving that the 
complaint involves three fallacies : The first consists in con¬ 
founding the desire for more money with the demand for more 
money. Desire is intelligible enough and needs no explana¬ 
tion, but demand for an article is a very different matter. 
It is the desire to have, accompanied by the willingness and 
ability to pay the price required. Whenever I enter Tiffany’s 
store, on Union Square, I want a thousand beautiful and 
costly things ; but my demand for his stock is pitifully small. 
The impecunious portions of the country have not, it is true, 
all the money they want, but it is absolutely certain that 
they have all that they demand. The same is true of every 
community and of every individual. 
The second fallacy consists in confounding the want of 
money with the want of capital. Those who call for it would 
indignantly reject the imputation that they are asking for 
alms ; they would, if the matter were put to them squarely, 
admit at once that they want money to build up and improve 
their portions of the country; to open mines of coal, ore and 
precious metal; to build roads and bridges; to erect factories 
and set wheels in motion. This is plainly the function of 
capital. Money is only the intermediary thing and the in¬ 
cident. The ultimate and substantive thing is capital. 
Money is desired only to give in exchange for something 
desired still more. Capital is wanted to keep and to hold 
and to employ in perpetuity. This is so obvious and so well 
understood that no further discussion of it is necessary. 
The third fallacy consists in attributing to a supposed de¬ 
ficiency of money effects which are produced by other causes 
and which would operate in substantially the same way 
