[33]Itisoneofthechieffailingsofclassicaleconomythatithasneversucceeded，bymeansofitsanalysisofcommodities，and，inparticular，oftheirvalue，indiscoveringthatformunderwhichvaluebecomesexchange—value。
　　EvenAdamSmithandRicardo，thebestrepresentativesoftheschool，treattheformofvalueasathingofnoimportance，ashavingnoconnexionwiththeinherentnatureofcommodities。Thereasonforthisisnotsolelybecausetheirattentionisentirelyabsorbedintheanalysisofthemagnitudeofvalue。Itliesdeeper。Thevalue—formoftheproductoflabourisnotonlythemostabstract，butisalsothemostuniversalform，takenbytheproductinbourgeoisproductionandstampsthatproductionasaparticularspeciesofsocialproduction，andtherebygivesititsspecialhistoricalcharacter。
　　IfthenwetreatthismodeofproductionasoneeternallyfixedbyNatureforeverystateofsociety，wenecessarilyoverlookthatwhichisthedifferentiaspecificaofthevalue—form，andconsequentlyofthecommodity—form，andofitsfurtherdevelopments，money—form，capital—form，&c。Weconsequentlyfindthateconomists，whoarethoroughlyagreedastolabour—timebeingthemeasureofthemagnitudeofvalue，havethemoststrangeandcontradictoryideasofmoney，theperfectedformofthegeneralequivalent。Thisisseeninastrikingmannerwhentheytreatofbanking，wherethecommonplacedefinitionsofmoneywillnolongerholdwater。Thisledtotheriseofarestoredmercantilesystem（Ganilh，&c。），whichseesinvaluenothingbutasocialform，orrathertheunsubstantialghostofthatform。OnceforallImayherestate，thatbyclassicalPoliticalEconomy，Iunderstandthateconomywhich，sincethetimeofW。Petty，hasinvestigatedtherealrelationsofproductioninbourgeoissocietyincontradistinctiontovulgareconomy，whichdealswithappearancesonly，ruminateswithoutceasingonthematerialslongsinceprovidedbyscientificeconomy，andthereseeksplausibleexplanationsofthemostobtrusivephenomena，forbourgeoisdailyuse，butfortherest，confinesitselftosystematisinginapedanticway，andproclaimingforeverlastingtruths，thetriteideasheldbytheself—complacentbourgeoisiewithregardtotheirownworld，tothemthebestofallpossibleworlds。
　　[34]"Leseconomistesontunesingulieremanieredeproceder。Iln’yapoureuxquedeuxsortesd’institutions，cellesdel’artetcellesdelanature。
　　Lesinstitutionsdelafeodalitesontdesinstitutionsartificiellescellesdelabourgeoisiesontdesinstitutionsnaturelles。Ilsressemblentenceciauxtheologiens，quieuxaussietablissentdeuxsortesdereligions。
　　Toutereligionquin’estpaslaleur，estuneinventiondeshommestandisqueleurproprereligionestuneemanationdeDieu—Ainsiilyaeudel’histoire，maisiln’yenaplus。"（KarlMarx。MiseredelaPhilosophie。
　　ReponsealaPhilosophiedelaMisereparM。Proudhon，1847，p。113。）TrulycomicalisM。Bastiat，whoimaginesthattheancientGreeksandRomanslivedbyplunderalone。Butwhenpeopleplunderforcenturies，theremustalwaysbesomethingathandforthemtoseize;theobjectsofplundermustbecontinuallyreproduced。ItwouldthusappearthatevenGreeksandRomanshadsomeprocessofproduction，consequently，aneconomy，whichjustasmuchconstitutedthematerialbasisoftheirworld，asbourgeoiseconomyconstitutesthatofourmodernworld。OrperhapsBastiatmeans，thatamodeofproductionbasedonslaveryisbasedonasystemofplunder。Inthatcasehetreadsondangerousground。IfagiantthinkerlikeAristotleerredinhisappreciationofslavelabour，whyshouldadwarfeconomistlikeBastiatberightinhisappreciationofwage—labour？IseizethisopportunityofshortlyansweringanobjectiontakenbyaGermanpaperinAmerica，tomywork，"ZurKritikderPol。Oekonomie，1859。"Intheestimationofthatpaper，myviewthateachspecialmodeofproductionandthesocialrelationscorrespondingtoit，inshort，thattheeconomicstructureofsociety，istherealbasisonwhichthejuridicalandpoliticalsuperstructureisraisedandtowhichdefinitesocialformsofthoughtcorrespond;thatthemodeofproductiondeterminesthecharacterofthesocial，political，andintellectuallifegenerally，allthisisverytrueforourowntimes，inwhichmaterialinterestspreponderate，butnotforthemiddleages，inwhichCatholicism，norforAthensandRome，wherepolitics，reignedsupreme。Inthefirstplaceitstrikesoneasanoddthingforanyonetosupposethatthesewell—wornphrasesaboutthemiddleagesandtheancientworldareunknowntoanyoneelse。Thismuch，however，isclear，thatthemiddleagescouldnotliveonCatholicism，northeancientworldonpolitics。
　　Onthecontrary，itisthemodeinwhichtheygainedalivelihoodthatexplainswhyherepolitics，andthereCatholicism，playedthechiefpart。
　　Fortherest，itrequiresbutaslightacquaintancewiththehistoryoftheRomanrepublic，forexample，tobeawarethatitssecrethistoryisthehistoryofitslandedproperty。Ontheotherhand，DonQuixotelongagopaidthepenaltyforwronglyimaginingthatknighterrantrywascompatiblewithalleconomicformsofsociety。
　　[35]"ObservationsoncertainverbaldisputesinPol。Econ。，particularlyrelatingtovalueandtodemandandsupply"Lond。，1821，p。16。
　　[36]S。Bailey，l。c。，p。165。
　　[37]Theauthorof"Observations"andS。BaileyaccuseRicardoofconvertingexchange—valuefromsomethingrelativeintosomethingabsolute。Theoppositeisthefact。Hehasexplainedtheapparentrelationbetweenobjects，suchasdiamondsandpearls，inwhichrelationtheyappearasexchange—values，anddisclosedthetruerelationhiddenbehindtheappearances，namely，theirrelationtoeachotherasmereexpressionsofhumanlabour。IfthefollowersofRicardoanswerBaileysomewhatrudely，andbynomeansconvincingly，thereasonistobesoughtinthis，thattheywereunabletofindinRicardo’sownworksanykeytothehiddenrelationsexistingbetweenvalueanditsform，exchange—value。
　　ChapterTwoKarlMarxCapitalVolumeOnePartI:
　　CommoditiesandMoneyCHAPTERTWO:
　　EXCHANGE
　　Itisplainthatcommoditiescannotgotomarketandmakeexchangesoftheirownaccount。Wemust，therefore，haverecoursetotheirguardians，whoarealsotheirownersCommoditiesarethings，andthereforewithoutpowerofresistanceagainstman。Iftheyarewantingindocilityhecanuseforce;inotherwords，hecantakepossessionofthem。[1]Inorderthattheseobjectsmayenterintorelationwitheachotherascommodities，theirguardiansmustplacethemselvesinrelationtooneanother，aspersonswhosewillresidesinthoseobject，andmustbehaveinsuchawaythateachdoesnotappropriatethecommodityoftheother，andpartwithhisown，exceptbymeansofanactdonebymutualconsent。Theymusttherefore，mutuallyrecogniseineachothertherightsofprivateproprietors。
　　Thisjuridicalrelation，whichthusexpressesitselfinacontract，whethersuchcontractbepartofadevelopedlegalsystemornot，isarelationbetweentwowills，andisbutthereflexoftherealeconomicrelationbetweenthetwo。Itisthiseconomicrelationthatdeterminesthesubject—mattercomprisedineachsuchjuridicalact。[2]
　　Thepersonsexistforoneanothermerelyasrepresentativesof，and，therefore。asownersof，commodities。Inthecourseofourinvestigationweshallfind，ingeneral，thatthecharacterswhoappearontheeconomicstagearebutthepersonificationsoftheeconomicrelationsthatexistbetweenthem。
　　Whatchieflydistinguishesacommodityfromitsowneristhefact，thatitlooksuponeveryothercommodityasbuttheformofappearanceofitsownvalue。Abornlevellerandacynic，itisalwaysreadytoexchangenotonlysoul，butbody，withanyandeveryothercommodity，bethesamemorerepulsivethanMaritornesherself。Theownermakesupforthislackinthecommodityofasenseoftheconcrete，byhisownfiveandmoresenses。
　　Hiscommoditypossessesforhimselfnoimmediateuse—value。Otherwise，hewouldnotbringittothemarket。Ithasuse—valueforothers;butforhimselfitsonlydirectuse—valueisthatofbeingadepositoryofexchange—value，and，consequently，ameansofexchange。[3]Therefore，hemakesuphismindtopartwithitforcommoditieswhosevalueinuseisofservicetohim。Allcommoditiesarenon—use—valuesfortheirowners，anduse—valuesfortheirnon—owners。Consequently，theymustallchangehands。Butthischangeofhandsiswhatconstitutestheirexchange，andthelatterputstheminrelationwitheachotherasvalues，andrealisesthemasvalues。Hencecommoditiesmustberealisedasvaluesbeforetheycanberealisedasuse—values。
　　Ontheotherhand，theymustshowthattheyareuse—valuesbeforetheycanberealisedasvalues。Forthelabourspentuponthemcountseffectively，onlyinsofarasitisspentinaformthatisusefulforothers。Whetherthatlabourisusefulforothers，anditsproductconsequentlycapableofsatisfyingthewantsofothers，canbeprovedonlybytheactofexchange。
　　Everyownerofacommoditywishestopartwithitinexchangeonlyforthosecommoditieswhoseuse—valuesatisfiessomewantofhis。Lookedatinthisway，exchangeisforhimsimplyaprivatetransaction。Ontheotherhand，hedesirestorealisethevalueofhiscommodity，toconvertitintoanyothersuitablecommodityofequalvalue，irrespectiveofwhetherhisowncommodityhasorhasnotanyuse—valuefortheowneroftheother。
　　Fromthispointofview，exchangeisforhimasocialtransactionofageneralcharacter。Butoneandthesamesetoftransactionscannotbesimultaneouslyforallownersofcommoditiesbothexclusivelyprivateandexclusivelysocialandgeneral。
　　Letuslookatthematteralittlecloser。Totheownerofacommodity，everyothercommodityis，inregardtohisown，aparticularequivalent，andconsequentlyhisowncommodityistheuniversalequivalentforalltheothers。Butsincethisappliestoeveryowner，thereis，infact，nocommodityactingasuniversalequivalent，andtherelativevalueofcommoditiespossessesnogeneralformunderwhichtheycanbeequatedasvaluesandhavethemagnitudeoftheirvaluescompared。Sofar，therefore，theydonotconfronteachotherascommodities，butonlyasproductsoruse—values。
　　IntheirdifficultiesourcommodityownersthinklikeFaust:"ImAnfangwardieThat。"Theythereforeactedandtransactedbeforetheythought。
　　Instinctivelytheyconformtothelawsimposedbythenatureofcommodities。
　　Theycannotbringtheircommoditiesintorelationasvalues，andthereforeascommodities，exceptbycomparingthemwithsomeoneothercommodityastheuniversalequivalent。Thatwesawfromtheanalysisofacommodity。
　　Butaparticularcommoditycannotbecometheuniversalequivalentexceptbyasocialact。Thesocialactionthereforeofallothercommodities，setsaparttheparticularcommodityinwhichtheyallrepresenttheirvalues。
　　Therebythebodilyformofthiscommoditybecomestheformofthesociallyrecogniseduniversalequivalent。Tobetheuniversalequivalent，becomes，bythissocialprocess，thespecificfunctionofthecommoditythusexcludedbytherest。Thusitbecomes梞oney。"Illiunumconsiliumhabentetvirtutemetpotestatemsuambestiaetradunt。Etnequispossitemereautvendere，nisiquihabetcharacteremautnomenbestiaeautnumerumnominisejus。"
　　（Apocalypse。）
　　Moneyisacrystalformedofnecessityinthecourseoftheexchanges，wherebydifferentproductsoflabourarepracticallyequatedtooneanotherandthusbypracticeconvertedintocommodities。Thehistoricalprogressandextensionofexchangesdevelopsthecontrast，latentincommodities，betweenuse—valueandvalue。Thenecessityforgivinganexternalexpressiontothiscontrastforthepurposesofcommercialintercourse，urgesontheestablishmentofanindependentformofvalue，andfindsnorestuntilitisonceforallsatisfiedbythedifferentiationofcommoditiesintocommoditiesandmoney。Atthesamerate，then，astheconversionofproductsintocommoditiesisbeingaccomplished，soalsoistheconversionofonespecialcommodityintomoney。[4]
　　Thedirectbarterofproductsattainstheelementaryformoftherelativeexpressionofvalueinonerespect，butnotinanother。ThatformisxCommodityA=yCommodityB。Theformofdirectbarterisxuse—valueA
　　=yuse—valueB。[5]ThearticlesAandBinthiscasearenotasyetcommodities，butbecomesoonlybytheactofbarter。Thefirststepmadebyanobjectofutilitytowardsacquiringexchange—valueiswhenitformsanon—use—valueforitsowner，andthathappenswhenitformsasuperfluousportionofsomearticlerequiredforhisimmediatewants。Objectsinthemselvesareexternaltoman，andconsequentlyalienablebyhim。Inorderthatthisalienationmaybereciprocal，itisonlynecessaryformen，byatacitunderstanding，totreateachotherasprivateownersofthosealienableobjects，andbyimplicationasindependentindividuals。Butsuchastateofreciprocalindependencehasnoexistenceinaprimitivesocietybasedonpropertyincommon，whethersuchasocietytakestheformofapatriarchalfamily，anancientIndiancommunity，oraPeruvianIncaState。Theexchangeofcommodities，therefore，firstbeginsontheboundariesofsuchcommunities，attheirpointsofcontactwithothersimilarcommunities，orwithmembersofthelatter。Sosoon，however，asproductsoncebecomecommoditiesintheexternalrelationsofacommunity，theyalso，byreaction，becomesoinitsinternalintercourse。Theproportionsinwhichtheyareexchangeableareatfirstquiteamatterofchance。Whatmakesthemexchangeableisthemutualdesireoftheirownerstoalienatethem。Meantimetheneedforforeignobjectsofutilitygraduallyestablishesitself。Theconstantrepetitionofexchangemakesitanormalsocialact。
　　Inthecourseoftime，therefore，someportionatleastoftheproductsoflabourmustbeproducedwithaspecialviewtoexchange。Fromthatmomentthedistinctionbecomesfirmlyestablishedbetweentheutilityofanobjectforthepurposesofconsumption，anditsutilityforthepurposesofexchange。
　　Itsuse—valuebecomesdistinguishedfromitsexchange—value。Ontheotherhand，thequantitativeproportioninwhichthearticlesareexchangeable，becomesdependentontheirproductionitself。Customstampsthemasvalueswithdefinitemagnitudes。
　　Inthedirectbarterofproducts，eachcommodityisdirectlyameansofexchangetoitsowner，andtoallotherpersonsanequivalent，butthatonlyinsofarasithasuse—valueforthem。Atthisstage，therefore，thearticlesexchangeddonotacquireavalue—formindependentoftheirownuse—value，oroftheindividualneedsoftheexchangers。Thenecessityforavalue—formgrowswiththeincreasingnumberandvarietyofthecommoditiesexchanged。Theproblemandthemeansofsolutionarisesimultaneously。
　　Commodity—ownersneverequatetheirowncommoditiestothoseofothers，andexchangethemonalargescale，withoutdifferentkindsofcommoditiesbelongingtodifferentownersbeingexchangeablefor，andequatedasvaluesto，oneandthesamespecialarticle。Suchlast—mentionedarticle，bybecomingtheequivalentofvariousothercommodities，acquiresatonce，thoughwithinnarrowlimits，thecharacterofageneralsocialequivalent。Thischaractercomesandgoeswiththemomentarysocialactsthatcalleditintolife。
　　Inturnsandtransientlyitattachesitselffirsttothisandthentothatcommodity。Butwiththedevelopmentofexchangeitfixesitselffirmlyandexclusivelytoparticularsortsofcommodities，andbecomescrystallisedbyassumingthemoney—form。Theparticularkindofcommoditytowhichitsticksisatfirstamatterofaccident。Neverthelesstherearetwocircumstanceswhoseinfluenceisdecisive。Themoney—formattachesitselfeithertothemostimportantarticlesofexchangefromoutside，andtheseinfactareprimitiveandnaturalformsinwhichtheexchange—valueofhomeproductsfindsexpression;orelseitattachesitselftotheobjectofutilitythatforms，likecattle，thechiefportionofindigenousalienablewealth。Nomadracesarethefirsttodevelopthemoney—form，becausealltheirworldlygoodsconsistofmoveableobjectsandarethereforedirectlyalienable;
　　andbecausetheirmodeoflife，bycontinuallybringingthemintocontactwithforeigncommunities，solicitstheexchangeofproducts。Manhasoftenmademanhimself，undertheformofslaves，serveastheprimitivematerialofmoney，buthasneverusedlandforthatpurpose。Suchanideacouldonlyspringupinabourgeoissocietyalreadywelldeveloped。Itdatesfromthelastthirdofthe17thcentury，andthefirstattempttoputitinpracticeonanationalscalewasmadeacenturyafterwards，duringtheFrenchbourgeoisrevolution。
　　Inproportionasexchangeburstsitslocalbonds，andthevalueofcommoditiesmoreandmoreexpandsintoanembodimentofhumanlabourintheabstract，inthesameproportionthecharacterofmoneyattachesitselftocommoditiesthatarebyNaturefittedtoperformthesocialfunctionofauniversalequivalent。Thosecommoditiesarethepreciousmetals。
　　Thetruthofthepropositionthat，"althoughgoldandsilverarenotbyNaturemoney，moneyisbyNaturegoldandsilver，"[6]isshownbythefitnessofthephysicalpropertiesofthesemetalsforthefunctionsofmoney。[7]Uptothispoint，however，weareacquaintedonlywithonefunctionofmoney，namely，toserveastheformofmanifestationofthevalueofcommodities，orasthematerialinwhichthemagnitudesoftheirvaluesaresociallyexpressed。Anadequateformofmanifestationofvalue，afitembodimentofabstract，undifferentiated，andthereforeequalhumanlabour，thatmaterialalonecanbewhoseeverysampleexhibitsthesameuniformqualities。Ontheotherhand，sincethedifferencebetweenthemagnitudesofvalueispurelyquantitative，themoneycommoditymustbesusceptibleofmerelyquantitativedifferences，mustthereforebedivisibleatwill，andequallycapableofbeingreunited。GoldandsilverpossessthesepropertiesbyNature。
　　Theuse—valueofthemoney—commoditybecomestwo—fold。Inadditiontoitsspecialuse—valueasacommodity（gold，forinstance，servingtostopteeth，toformtherawmaterialofarticlesofluxury，&c。），itacquiresaformaluse—value，originatinginitsspecificsocialfunction。
　　Sinceallcommoditiesaremerelyparticularequivalentsofmoney，thelatterbeingtheiruniversalequivalent，they，withregardtothelatterastheuniversalcommodity，playthepartsofparticularcommodities。[8]
　　Wehaveseenthatthemoney—formisbutthereflex，thrownupononesinglecommodity，ofthevaluerelationsbetweenalltherest。Thatmoneyisacommodity[9]isthereforeanewdiscoveryonlyforthosewho，whentheyanalyseit，startfromitsfullydevelopedshape。Theactofexchangegivestothecommodityconvertedintomoney，notitsvalue，butitsspecificvalue—form。Byconfoundingthesetwodistinctthingssomewritershavebeenledtoholdthatthevalueofgoldandsilverisimaginary。[10]Thefactthatmoneycan，incertainfunctions，bereplacedbymeresymbolsofitself，gaverisetothatothermistakennotion，thatitisitselfameresymbol。Neverthelessunderthiserrorlurkedapresentimentthatthemoney—formofanobjectisnotaninseparablepartofthatobject，butissimplytheformunderwhichcertainsocialrelationsmanifestthemselves。
　　Inthissenseeverycommodityisasymbol，since，insofarasitisvalue，itisonlythematerialenvelopeofthehumanlabourspentuponit。[11]Butifitbedeclaredthatthesocialcharactersassumedbyobjects，orthematerialformsassumedbythesocialqualitiesoflabourundertherégimeofadefinitemodeofproduction，aremeresymbols，itisinthesamebreathalsodeclaredthatthesecharacteristicsarearbitraryfictionssanctionedbytheso—calleduniversalconsentofmankind。Thissuitedthemodeofexplanationinfavourduringthe18thcentury。Unabletoaccountfortheoriginofthepuzzlingformsassumedbysocialrelationsbetweenmanandman，peoplesoughttodenudethemoftheirstrangeappearancebyascribingtothemaconventionalorigin。
　　Ithasalreadybeenremarkedabovethattheequivalentformofacommoditydoesnotimplythedeterminationofthemagnitudeofitsvalue。Therefore，althoughwemaybeawarethatgoldismoney，andconsequentlydirectlyexchangeableforallothercommodities，yetthatfactbynomeanstellshowmuch10lbs。，forinstance，ofgoldisworth。Money，likeeveryothercommodity，cannotexpressthemagnitudeofitsvalueexceptrelativelyinothercommodities。Thisvalueisdeterminedbythelabour—timerequiredforitsproduction，andisexpressedbythequantityofanyothercommoditythatcoststhesameamountoflabour—time。[12]Suchquantitativedeterminationofitsrelativevaluetakesplaceatthesourceofitsproductionbymeansofbarter。Whenitstepsintocirculationasmoney，itsvalueisalreadygiven。Inthelastdecadesofthe17thcenturyithadalreadybeenshownthatmoneyisacommodity，butthisstepmarksonlytheinfancyoftheanalysis。Thedifficultylies，notincomprehendingthatmoneyisacommodity，butindiscoveringhow，why，andbywhatmeansacommoditybecomesmoney。[13]
　　Wehavealreadyseen，fromthemostelementaryexpressionofvalue，xcommodityA=ycommodityB，thattheobjectinwhichthemagnitudeofthevalueofanotherobjectisrepresented，appearstohavetheequivalentformindependentlyofthisrelation，asasocialpropertygiventoitbyNature。Wefollowedupthisfalseappearancetoitsfinalestablishment，whichiscompletesosoonastheuniversalequivalentformbecomesidentifiedwiththebodilyformofaparticularcommodity，andthuscrystallisedintothemoney—form。Whatappearstohappenis，notthatgoldbecomesmoney，inconsequenceofallothercommoditiesexpressingtheirvaluesinit，but，onthecontrary，thatallothercommoditiesuniversallyexpresstheirvaluesingold，becauseitismoney。Theintermediatestepsoftheprocessvanishintheresultandleavenotracebehind。Commoditiesfindtheirownvaluealreadycompletelyrepresented，withoutanyinitiativeontheirpart，inanothercommodityexistingincompanywiththem。Theseobjects，goldandsilver，justastheycomeoutofthebowelsoftheearth，areforthwiththedirectincarnationofallhumanlabour。Hencethemagicofmoney。Intheformofsocietynowunderconsideration，thebehaviourofmeninthesocialprocessofproductionispurelyatomic。Hencetheirrelationstoeachotherinproductionassumeamaterialcharacterindependentoftheircontrolandconsciousindividualaction。Thesefactsmanifestthemselvesatfirstbyproductsasageneralruletakingtheformofcommodities。
　　Wehaveseenhowtheprogressivedevelopmentofasocietyofcommodity—producersstampsoneprivilegedcommoditywiththecharacterofmoney。Hencetheriddlepresentedbymoneyisbuttheriddlepresentedbycommodities;onlyitnowstrikesusinitsmostglaringform。
　　Footnotes[1]Inthe12thcentury，sorenownedforitspiety，theyincludedamongstcommoditiessomeverydelicatethings。ThusaFrenchpoetoftheperiodenumeratesamongstthegoodstobefoundinthemarketofLandit，notonlyclothingshoes，leather，agriculturalimplements，&c。，butalso"femmesfollesdeleurcorps。"
　　[2]ProudhonbeginsbytakinghisidealofJustice，of"justiceéternelle，"
　　fromthejuridicalrelationsthatcorrespondtotheproductionofcommodities:
　　thereby，itmaybenoted，heproves，totheconsolationofallgoodcitizens，thattheproductionofcommoditiesisaformofproductionaseverlastingasjustice。Thenheturnsroundandseekstoreformtheactualproductionofcommodities，andtheactuallegalsystemcorrespondingthereto，inaccordancewiththisideal。Whatopinionshouldwehaveofachemist，who，insteadofstudyingtheactuallawsofthemolecularchangesinthecompositionanddecompositionofmatter，andonthatfoundationsolvingdefiniteproblems，claimedtoregulatethecompositionanddecompositionofmatterbymeansofthe"eternalideas，"of"naturalité"and"affinité"？Dowereallyknowanymoreabout"usury，"whenwesayitcontradicts"justiceéternelle，"équitééternelle"mutualité
　　éternelle，"andothervéritéséternellethanthefathersofthechurchdidwhentheysaiditwasincompatiblewith’—grâceéternelle，""foiéternelle，"and"lavolontééternelledeDieu"？
　　[3]"Fortwo—foldistheuseofeveryobject……Theoneispeculiartotheobjectassuch，theotherisnot，asasandalwhichmaybeworn，andisalsoexchangeable。Bothareusesofthesandal，forevenhewhoexchangesthesandalforthemoneyorfoodheisinwantof，makesuseofthesandalasasandal。Butnotinitsnaturalway。Forithasnotbeenmadeforthesakeofbeingexchanged。"（Aristoteles，"DeRep。"l。i。c。9。）
　　[4]Fromthiswemayformanestimateoftheshrewdnessofthepetit—bourgeoissocialism。which，whileperpetuatingtheproductionofcommodities，aimsatabolishingthe"antagonism"betweenmoneyandcommodities，andconsequently，sincemoneyexistsonlybyvirtueofthisantagonism，atabolishingmoneyitself。WemightjustaswelltrytoretainCatholicismwithoutthePope。
　　Formoreonthispointseemywork，"ZurKritikderPol。Oekon。"，p。61，sq。
　　[5]Solongas，insteadoftwodistinctuse—valuesbeingexchanged，achaoticmassofarticlesareofferedastheequivalentofasinglearticle，whichisoftenthecasewithsavages，eventhedirectbarterofproductsisinitsfirstinfancy。
　　[6]KarlMarx，l。c。，p。135。"Imetalli……naturalmentemoneta。"（Galiani，"Dellamoneta"inCustodi’sCollection:ParteModernat。iii。）
　　[7]Forfurtherdetailsonthissubjectseeinmyworkcitedabove，thechapteron"Thepreciousmetals。"
　　[8]"Ildanaroèlamerceuniversale"（Verri，l。c。，p。16）。
　　[9]"Silverandgoldthemselves（whichwemaycallbythegeneralnameofbullion）
　　are……commodities……risingandfallingin……value……Bullion，then，maybereckonedtobeofhighervaluewherethesmallerweightwillpurchasethegreaterquantityoftheproductormanufactureofthecountrey，"&c。
　　（"ADiscourseoftheGeneralNotionsofMoney，Trade，andExchanges，asTheyStandinRelationeachtoother。"ByaMerchant。Lond。，1695，p。7。）
　　"Silverandgold，coinedoruncoined，thoughtheyareusedforameasureofallotherthings，arenolessacommoditythanwine，oil，tobacco，cloth，orstuffs。"（"ADiscourseconcerningTrade，andthatinparticularoftheEastIndies，"&c。London，1689，p。2。）"Thestockandrichesofthekingdomcannotproperlybeconfinedtomoney，noroughtgoldandsilvertobeexcludedfrombeingmerchandise。"（"TheEast—IndiaTradeaMostProfitableTrade。"London，1677，p。4。）
　　[10]"L’oroel’argentohannovalorecomemetallianterioreall’essermoneta。"
　　（Galiani，l。c。）Lockesays，"Theuniversalconsentofmankindgavetosilver，onaccountofitsqualitieswhichmadeitsuitableformoney，animaginaryvalue。"Law，ontheotherhand。"Howcoulddifferentnationsgiveanimaginaryvaluetoanysinglething……orhowcouldthisimaginaryvaluehavemaintaineditself？"Butthefollowingshowshowlittlehehimselfunderstoodaboutthematter:"Silverwasexchangedinproportiontothevalueinuseitpossessed，consequentlyinproportiontoitsrealvalue。
　　Byitsadoptionasmoneyitreceivedanadditionalvalue（unevaleuradditionnelle）"。
　　（JeanLaw:"Considérationssurlenuméraireetlecommerce"
　　inE。Daire’sEdit。of"EconomistesFinanciersduXVIIIsiècle，"
　　p。470。）
　　[11]"L’Argenten（desdenrées）estlesigne。"（V。deForbonnais:"ElementsduCommerce，Nouv。Edit。Leyde，1766，"t。II。，p。143。）"Commesigneilestattireparlesdenrées。"（l。c。，p。155。）"L’argentestunsigned’unechoseetlareprésente。"（Montesquieu:"EspritdesLois，"
　　（Oeuvres，Lond。1767，t。II，p。2。）"L’argentn’estpassimplesigne，carilestlui—memerichesse，ilnereprésentepaslesvaleurs，illeséquivaut。"（LeTrosne，l。c。，p。910。）"Thenotionofvaluecontemplatesthevaluablearticleasameresymbol—thearticlecountsnotforwhatitis，butforwhatitisworth。"（Hegel，l。c。，p。100。）Lawyersstartedlongbeforeeconomiststheideathatmoneyisameresymbol，andthatthevalueofthepreciousmetalsispurelyimaginary。Thistheydidinthesycophanticserviceofthecrownedheads，supportingtherightofthelattertodebasethecoinage，duringthewholeofthemiddleages，bythetraditionsoftheRomanEmpireandtheconceptionsofmoneytobefoundinthePandects。
　　"Qu’aucunpuissenidoivefairedoute，"saysanaptscholaroftheirsPhilipofValois，inadecreeof1346，"queànousetànotremajesté
　　royalen’appartiennentseulement……lemestier，lefait，l’état，laprovisionettoutel’ordonnancedesmonnaies，dedonnertelcours，etpourtelprixcommeilnousplaitetbonnoussemble。"ItwasamaximoftheRomanLawthatthevalueofmoneywasfixedbydecreeoftheemperor。
　　Itwasexpresslyforbiddentotreatmoneyasacommodity。"Pecuniasveronulliemerefaserit，naminusupublicoconstitutasoportetnonessemercem。"
　　SomegoodworkonthisquestionhasbeendonebyG。F。Pagnini:"Saggiosoprailgiustopregiodellecose，1751";Custodi"ParteModerna，"t。II。
　　InthesecondpartofhisworkPagninidirectshispolemicsespeciallyagainstthelawyers。
　　[12]"IfamancanbringtoLondonanounceofSilveroutoftheEarthinPeru，inthesametimethathecanproduceabushelofCorn，thentheoneisthenaturalpriceoftheother;now，ifbyreasonofnewormoreeasierminesamancanprocuretwoouncesofsilveraseasilyasheformerlydidone，thecornwillbeascheapattenshillingsthebushelasitwasbeforeatfiveshillings，caeterisparibus。"WilliamPetty。"ATreatiseofTaxesandContributions。"Lond。，1667，p。32。
　　[13]ThelearnedProfessorRoscher，afterfirstinformingusthat"thefalsedefinitionsofmoneymaybedividedintotwomaingroups:thosewhichmakeitmore，andthosewhichmakeitless，thanacommodity，"givesusalongandverymixedcatalogueofworksonthenatureofmoney，fromwhichitappearsthathehasnottheremotestideaoftherealhistoryofthetheory;
　　andthenhemoralisesthus:"Fortherest，itisnottobedeniedthatmostofthelatereconomistsdonotbearsufficientlyinmindthepeculiarities—thatdistinguishmoneyfromothercommodities"（itisthen，afterall，eithermoreorlessthanacommodity！）……’Sofar，thesemi—mercantilistreactionofGanilhisnotaltogetherwithoutfoundation。"（WilhelmRoscher:"DieGrundlagenderNationaloekonomie，"3rdEdn。1858，pp。207—210。）More！less！
　　notsufficiently！sofar！notaltogether！Whatclearnessandprecisionofideasandlanguage！AndsucheclecticprofessorialtwaddleismodestlybaptisedbyMr。Roscher，"theanatomico—physiologicalmethod"ofPoliticalEconomy！Onediscoveryhowever，hemusthavecreditfor，namely，thatmoneyis"apleasantcommodity。"