CHAPTER XII.

FUNDAMENTAL ERRORS OF GOVERNMENTS.

THE fundamental errors of governments may be all classed under three heads.

The first grand error has been the establishment of the principle, that property rightly belongs not to him that makes it, but to him that has power to take it from him that does make it. From this error, springs almost all the wars and contentions between tribes, nations, kings and individuals. The robber justifies himself on the ground of the admission of this error, somewhat consistently too.

The second is in confirming the usurpations of kingly despots in seizing the elements of Nature; making them their own private property, and dictating the terms upon which the rest of mankind might enjoy them. This error is the grand lever by which the king and the capitalist are enabled to deprive the producers of wealth of the fruits of their industry; reduce them to beggary, starvation and death, just as it may suit their pleasure.

The third, is the right claimed by kings and governments of interfering with the products of labor, by causing them to represent more labor than it has cost to produce them; and by making them cost more labor than is required to produce them. From the prevalence of this error, arises the right of kings and governments to debase the currency of a country, either by the means of base metal, or paper money; thereby swindling the producers of wealth out of the fruits of their industry: also, all the cheating, swindling tricks of commerce, banking, shaving, &c.

In lieu of the above errors, we propose some fundamental curative truths; by the universal understanding of which, most of the moral and social evils, which at present afflict and destroy the peace of mankind, will be destroyed.

First. Let the producers of property be the rightful owners of what they produce; and, when given in exchange for other property, let it be for an equivalent; that is, of equal cost. This, we contend, every man has an unequi

7

vocal right to, or a weak or poor man has no right to live. Has a man a right to his own limbs? Surely, no man will deny this. But we deny that he has any better right to his own limbs, than he has to whatever is produced by them. If any man has a right to take from another any portion of what he makes, what portion is it? If it is in proportion to his power, then it follows, as a matter of course, that if A be strong enough, or rich enough, he may take from B every thing he makes; and, finally, starve him to death. But this right we deny. The only just and rightful first owner to a piece of property, is he who makes it.

Second. Let all laws and customs be abolished which confound the natural or intrinsic value of the elements of nature with the products of man's labor. The custom of man in assuming exclusive ownership of the elements of nature, with the right to make another pay him for the use of them, is too glaring an absurdity to require a serious argument. What would you think of a man who should undertake to require other men to pay him daily a certain sum of money; say half as much as he could earn, or half a day's labor, because he enjoyed the sunshine, or because he breathed the atmosphere? Would you not think this a very strange requirement? Surely, you would. But, strange as it may appear, this very thing is effected, virtually, to an immense extent, in the form of rent for the use of land. There is just as much propriety and honesty in exacting pay for the use of either, because no man ever did or can make either; therefore, has no right to sell or exact pay for the use of either. All this, and much more tyranny and injustice arises from the error of confounding the value of the elements of nature with that of human labor. and has perplexed and bewildered almost all writers on Political Economy, and has rendered their works so unintelligible, so "unnatural and paradoxical."

For a more perfect understanding of this part of the subject, the reader is referred to Gray's lecture, who has done the subject ample justice.

Third. For a remedy for the third grand error, we propose that the gold and silver coins correspond with the standard weights of the country, by which all other commodities are weighed. The avoirdupois would, perhaps, be most convenient. Let the standard silver be about as at present, ten per cent. alloy, and the gold twenty-two

carets which should never be allowed to be altered; because, if they were, the effect would be the same as if the measures of length and capacity had been altered. Now suppose the dollar equal in weight to one ounce avoirdupois; sixteen dollars would weigh one pound, and fractional parts would be twenty pennyweights to the dollar, or twenty five-cent pieces-halves and quarters in proportion. Gold pieces should be of corresponding weight; then, as the relative exchangeable value is at this time as one to sixteen, it will follow, that one gold piece of an ounce weight, would be equal to sixteen dollars, or ounces of silver. No matter what the pieces be called, so they do but correctly indicate the weight and fineness, which was the original object in stamping coins-nothing more. Sufficient having been said on this point in the seventh chapter, we pass on.

If such a system were once established over the commercial world, it would break up all the money juggling of the world, because every body would understand the subject, and the producers of wealth would never submit to the impositions they now suffer in consequence of their present ignorance of the nature of it. There is, perhaps, no greater absurdity than the announcements we often see in the public papers in regard to the state of the "money -market," in which "specie" is quoted at a "premium."

Now this is what really never can exist, for the plain and simple reason, that a thing can never be worth more than itself. Can a bushel of wheat ever be worth more than a bushel of wheat? No, never. But a bushel of wheat is, sometimes, worth more money than at others, but is never worth more wheat in the same place and at the same time. Neither can an ounce of silver be worth more than an ounce of silver, nor a dollar worth more than a dollar, must be self-evident to all. Such an announcement is nothing more than one of the gull-traps made use of by the banker and broker, in order to cover up the iniquity of their own unjust operations; for the real meaning is this that the paper-money makers have debased or depreciated the whole amount of the circulating medium of the country to the ratio of the pretended premium. Such are some of the means made use of "to cajole and flatter the farmers, mechanics and laborers, because they are the most numerous, aud wield the greatest power at the ballot

boxes;" as Judge Hall says. It is one of the tricks of trade, by which things are made to represent more labor than it costs to make them.

If such a plan as here proposed, and as once existed, when men were honest, there never could exist a necessity for an alteration of it, neither would it ever be allowed by the people.

If an unusual influx of gold should happen to take place, by the discovery of it in larger quantities, or by the discovery of some process by which a given quantity could be produced at less cost, or in less time than formerly, it would, naturally, become cheaper; or, in other words, an ounce would sell for a less number of dollars, or ounces of silver. On the contrary, if gold should become more scarce, or cost more labor to produce the same quantity, than formerly, then it would, naturally, become dearer; or, in other words, an ounce would exchange for more dollars or ounces of silver. But in no case would it ever be necessary to alter the weight or fineness of the coins. One of the metals only should be made a legal tender in payment of debts; the other should only be considered an article of commerce. If this were the case, no difficulty would occur in case the relative commercial values of the two metals should happen to be disturbed. This is wherein our own laws are defective, because they make gold and silver both legal tenders in payment of debts; the consequence was, that the gold was rapidly leaving the country to find a better price in Europe, where they gave sixteen dollars an ounce ; whereas, in this country, the law required only fifteen to be paid for it. No one, therefore, would be willing to take fifteen dollars for an article that he could get sixteen for. If the law, therefore, had made but one of the metals a legal tender, there would have been no necessity to have altered our gold coin as it was in 1834, especially, if the coins had been of equal weight. This subject has been explained in the ninth chapter; and if the reader's mind wants refreshing, he had better turn to it.

1

The copper coins do not enter into the aggregate value of the circulating medium, being only an article of convenience to represent the small fractions; their value being altogether nominal. The commercial value of copper is not over twenty-four cents per pound; but, in cents coined, there is forty to the pound, but are not a legal tender: if

they were made so, it would be necessary, to prevent impositions, to restrict the number in any single payment, as it is in England at present-say not over ninety-nine. That such a provision would be of much utility, must be evident to all; and would, in time, break up the money juggling of the world.

It must be evident, from an inspection of the above table, that as the products of labor become more and more concentrated, they become more and more valuable: this arises principally from two causes. First, from the additional quantity of labor, for which the producer must be paid, or quit the business. Second, from the fact that they become more durable, less bulky, and can, therefore, be transported to a greater distance than before; for all which the distant consumer is willing to pay in all cases where the article wanted cannot be produced at home. And, with this kind of intercourse, governments ought never be allowed to interfere, as all interference of the kind are violations of individual rights. As the exchangable value of all commodities arises from the quantity of labor required to produce them, the last column shows that one ounce of gold is equal in value to 512 ounces of beeswax, or thirty-two pounds. The reason is, that it requires the same amount of labor to produce and bring to market 512 ounces of beeswax, as it will one ounce of gold: and so of all other commodities. When the mass of the people understand the truth of these principles, but one kind of weights will be used for weighing all things that are bought and sold by weight; the mysteries of commerce will be developed, and mankind, from the necessity of the case, will be obliged to return to the practice of justice and honesty. But legal property, or money value in the elements, must first be abolished.