資本論 CHAPTER 3: MONEY, OR THE CIRCULATION OF COMMODITIES003

Paper

money

is

a

token

representing

gold

or

money.The

relation

between

it

and

the

values

of

commodities

is

this,

that

the

latter

are

ideally

expressed

in

the

same

quantities

of

gold

that

are

symbolically

represented

by

the

paper.

Only

in

so

far

as

paper

money

represents

gold,

which

like

all

other

commodities

has

value,

is

it

a

symbol

of

value.37

Finally,

some

one

may

ask

why

gold

is

capable

of

being

replaced

by

tokens

that

have

no

value

But,

as

we

have

already

seen,

it

is

capable

of

being

so

replaced

only

in

so

far

as

it

functions

exclusively

as

coin,

or

as

the

circulating

medium,

and

as

nothing

else.

Now,

money

has

other

functions

besides

this

one,

and

the

isolated

function

of

serving

as

the

mere

circulating

medium

is

not

necessarily

the

only

one

attached

to

gold

coin,

although

this

is

the

case

with

those

abraded

coins

that

continue

to

circulate.

Each

piece

of

money

is

a

mere

coin,

or

means

of

circulation,only

so

long

as

it

actually

circulates.

But

this

is

just

the

case

with

that

minimum

mass

of

gold,

which

is

capable

of

being

replaced

by

paper

money.

That

mass

remains

constantly

within

the

sphere

of

circulation,continually

functions

as

a

circulating

medium,

and

exists

exclusively

for

that

purpose.

Its

movement

therefore

represents

nothing

but

the

continued

alternation

of

the

inverse

phases

of

the

metamorphosis

C–M–C,

phases

in

which

commodities

confront

their

value-forms,

only

to

disappear

again

immediately.The

independent

existence

of

the

exchange-value

of

a

commodity

is

here

a

transient

apparition,

by

means

of

which

the

commodity

is

immediately

replaced

by

another

commodity.

Hence,

in

this

process

which

continually

makes

money

pass

from

hand

to

hand,the

mere

symbolical

existence

of

money

suffices.

Its

functional

existence

absorbs,

so

to

say,

its

material

existence.

Being

a

transient

and

objective

reflex

of

the

prices

of

commodities,

it

serves

only

as

a

symbol

of

itself,

and

is

therefore

capable

of

being

replaced

by

a

token.38One

thing

is,

however,

requisite;

this

token

must

have

an

objective

social

validity

of

its

own,

and

this

the

paper

symbol

acquires

by

its

forced

currency.This

compulsory

action

of

the

State

can

take

effect

only

within

that

inner

sphere

of

circulation

which

is

coterminous

with

the

territories

of

the

community,but

it

is

also

only

within

that

sphere

that

money

completely

responds

to

its

function

of

being

the

circulating

medium,

or

becomes

coin.

Section

3:

Money

The

commodity

that

functions

as

a

measure

of

value,and,

either

in

its

own

person

or

by

a

representative,

as

the

medium

of

circulation,

is

money.

Gold

(or

silver)

is

therefore

money.

It

functions

as

money,

on

the

one

hand,

when

it

has

to

be

present

in

its

own

golden

person.

It

is

then

the

money-commodity,

neither

merely

ideal,

as

in

its

function

of

a

measure

of

value,nor

capable

of

being

represented,

as

in

its

function

of

circulating

medium.

On

the

other

hand,

it

also

functions

as

money,

when

by

virtue

of

its

function,whether

that

function

be

performed

in

person

or

by

representative,

it

congeals

into

the

sole

form

of

value,the

only

adequate

form

of

existence

of

exchange

value,

in

opposition

to

use-value,

represented

by

all

other

commodities.

A.

Hoarding

The

continual

movement

in

circuits

of

the

two

antithetical

metamorphoses

of

commodities,

or

the

never

ceasing

alternation

of

sale

and

purchase,

is

reflected

in

the

restless

currency

of

money,

or

in

the

function

that

money

performs

of

a

perpetuum

mobile

of

circulation.

But

so

soon

as

the

series

of

metamorphoses

is

interrupted,

so

soon

as

sales

are

not

supplemented

by

subsequent

purchases,

money

ceases

to

be

mobilised;

it

is

transformed,

as

Boisguillebert

says,

from

\"meuble\"

into

\"immeuble,\"

from

movable

into

immovable,

from

coin

into

money.

With

the

very

earliest

development

of

the

circulation

of

commodities,

there

is

also

developed

the

necessity,and

the

passionate

desire,

to

hold

fast

the

product

of

the

first

metamorphosis.

This

product

is

the

transformed

shape

of

the

commodity,

or

its

goldchrysalis.39Commodities

are

thus

sold

not

for

the

purpose

of

buying

others,

but

in

order

to

replace

their

commodity-form

by

their

money-form.

From

being

the

mere

means

of

effecting

the

circulation

of

commodities,

this

change

of

form

becomes

the

end

and

aim.

The

changed

form

of

the

commodity

is

thus

prevented

from

functioning

as

its

unconditionally

alienable

form,

or

as

its

merely

transient

money-form.The

money

becomes

petrified

into

a

hoard,

and

the

seller

becomes

a

hoarder

of

money.

In

the

early

stages

of

the

circulation

of

commodities,it

is

the

surplus

use-values

alone

that

are

converted

into

money.

Gold

and

silver

thus

become

of

themselves

social

expressions

for

superfluity

or

wealth.This

naive

form

of

hoarding

becomes

perpetuated

in

those

communities

in

which

the

traditional

mode

of

production

is

carried

on

for

the

supply

of

a

fixed

and

limited

circle

of

home

wants.

It

is

thus

with

the

people

of

Asia,

and

particularly

of

the

East

Indies.Vanderlint,

who

fancies

that

the

prices

of

commodities

in

a

country

are

determined

by

the

quantity

of

gold

and

silver

to

be

found

in

it,

asks

himself

why

Indian

commodities

are

so

cheap.

Answer:

Because

the

Hindus

bury

their

money.

From

1602

to

1734,

he

remarks,

they

buried

150

millions

of

pounds

sterling

of

silver,

which

originally

came

from

America

to

Europe.40In

the

10

years

from

1856

to

1866,

England

exported

to

India

and

China

￡120,000,000

in

silver,which

had

been

received

in

exchange

for

Australian

gold.

Most

of

the

silver

exported

to

China

makes

its

way

to

India.

As

the

production

of

commodities

further

develops,every

producer

of

commodities

is

compelled

to

make

sure

of

the

nexus

rerum

or

the

social

pledge.41His

wants

are

constantly

making

themselves

felt,

and

necessitate

the

continual

purchase

of

other

people's

commodities,

while

the

production

and

sale

of

his

own

goods

require

time,

and

depend

upon

circumstances.

In

order

then

to

be

able

to

buy

without

selling,

he

must

have

sold

previously

without

buying.

This

operation,conducted

on

a

general

scale,

appears

to

imply

a

contradiction.

But

the

precious

metals

at

the

sources

of

their

production

are

directly

exchanged

for

other

commodities.

And

here

we

have

sales

(by

the

owners

of

commodities)

without

purchases

(by

the

owners

of

gold

or

silver).42And

subsequent

sales,

by

other

producers,

unfollowed

by

purchases,

merely

bring

about

the

distribution

of

the

newly

produced

precious

metals

among

all

the

owners

of

commodities.

In

this

way,

all

along

the

line

of

exchange,

hoards

of

gold

and

silver

of

varied

extent

are

accumulated.

With

the

possibility

of

holding

and

storing

up

exchange

value

in

the

shape

of

a

particular

commodity,

arises

also

the

greed

for

gold.

Along

with

the

extension

of

circulation,

increases

the

power

of

money,

that

absolutely

social

form

of

wealth

ever

ready

for

use.\"Gold

is

a

wonderful

thing!

Whoever

possesses

it

is

lord

of

all

he

wants.

By

means

of

gold

one

can

even

get

souls

into

Paradise.\"

(Columbus

in

his

letter

from

Jamaica,

1503.)

Since

gold

does

not

disclose

what

has

been

transformed

into

it,

everything,

commodity

or

not,

is

convertible

into

gold.

Everything

becomes

saleable

and

buyable.

The

circulation

becomes

the

great

social

retort

into

which

everything

is

thrown,to

come

out

again

as

a

gold-crystal.

Not

even

are

the

bones

of

saints,

and

still

less

are

more

delicate

res

sacrosanctae,

extra

commercium

hominum

able

to

withstand

this

alchemy.43Just

as

every

qualitative

difference

between

commodities

is

extinguished

in

money,

so

money,

on

its

side,

like

the

radical

leveller

that

it

is,

does

away

with

all

distinctions.43aBut

money

itself

is

a

commodity,

an

external

object,

capable

of

becoming

the

private

property

of

any

individual.

Thus

social

power

becomes

the

private

power

of

private

persons.

The

ancients

therefore

denounced

money

as

subversive

of

the

economic

and

moral

order

of

things.43bModern

society,

which,

soon

after

its

birth,pulled

Plutus

by

the

hair

of

his

head

from

the

bowels

of

the

earth,44greets

gold

as

its

Holy

Grail,

as

the

glittering

incarnation

of

the

very

principle

of

its

own

life.

A

commodity,

in

its

capacity

of

a

use-value,satisfies

a

particular

want,

and

is

a

particular

element

of

material

wealth.

But

the

value

of

a

commodity

measures

the

degree

of

its

attraction

for

all

other

elements

of

material

wealth,

and

therefore

measures

the

social

wealth

of

its

owner.

To

a

barbarian

owner

of

commodities,

and

even

to

a

West-European

peasant,value

is

the

same

as

value-form,

and

therefore,

to

him

the

increase

in

his

hoard

of

gold

and

silver

is

an

increase

in

value.

It

is

true

that

the

value

of

money

varies,

at

one

time

in

consequence

of

a

variation

in

its

own

value,

at

another,

in

consequence

of

a

change

in

the

values

of

commodities.

But

this,

on

the

one

hand,

does

not

prevent

200

ounces

of

gold

from

still

containing

more

value

than

100

ounces,

nor,

on

the

other

hand,

does

it

hinder

the

actual

metallic

form

of

this

article

from

continuing

to

be

the

universal

equivalent

form

of

all

other

commodities,

and

the

immediate

social

incarnation

of

all

human

labour.

The

desire

after

hoarding

is

in

its

very

nature

unsatiable.

In

its

qualitative

aspect,

or

formally

considered,

money

has

no

bounds

to

its

efficacy,

i.e.,

it

is

the

universal

representative

of

material

wealth,

because

it

is

directly

convertible

into

any

other

commodity.

But,

at

the

same

time,

every

actual

sum

of

money

is

limited

in

amount,

and,

therefore,

as

a

means

of

purchasing,has

only

a

limited

efficacy.

This

antagonism

between

the

quantitative

limits

of

money

and

its

qualitative

boundlessness,

continually

acts

as

a

spur

to

the

hoarder

in

his

Sisyphus-like

labour

of

accumulating.

It

is

with

him

as

it

is

with

a

conqueror

who

sees

in

every

new

country

annexed,

only

a

new

boundary.

In

order

that

gold

may

be

held

as

money,

and

made

to

form

a

hoard,

it

must

be

prevented

from

circulating,or

from

transforming

itself

into

a

means

of

enjoyment.The

hoarder,

therefore,

makes

a

sacrifice

of

the

lusts

of

the

flesh

to

his

gold

fetish.

He

acts

in

earnest

up

to

the

Gospel

of

abstention.

On

the

other

hand,

he

can

withdraw

from

circulation

no

more

than

what

he

has

thrown

into

it

in

the

shape

of

commodities.

The

more

he

produces,

the

more

he

is

able

to

sell.

Hard

work,saving,

and

avarice

are,

therefore,

his

three

cardinal

virtues,

and

to

sell

much

and

buy

little

the

sum

of

his

political

economy.45

By

the

side

of

the

gross

form

of

a

hoard,

we

find

also

its

aesthetic

form

in

the

possession

of

gold

and

silver

articles.

This

grows

with

the

wealth

of

civil

society.

\"Soyons

riches

ou

paraissons

riches\"

(Diderot).

In

this

way

there

is

created,

on

the

one

hand,

a

constantly

extending

market

for

gold

and

silver,unconnected

with

their

functions

as

money,

and,

on

the

other

hand,

a

latent

source

of

supply,

to

which

recourse

is

had

principally

in

times

of

crisis

and

social

disturbance.

Hoarding

serves

various

purposes

in

the

economy

of

the

metallic

circulation.

Its

first

function

arises

out

of

the

conditions

to

which

the

currency

of

gold

and

silver

coins

is

subject.

We

have

seen

how,

along

with

the

continual

fluctuations

in

the

extent

and

rapidity

of

the

circulation

of

commodities

and

in

their

prices,

the

quantity

of

money

current

unceasingly

ebbs

and

flows.This

mass

must,

therefore,

be

capable

of

expansion

and

contraction.

At

one

time

money

must

be

attracted

in

order

to

act

as

circulating

coin,

at

another,circulating

coin

must

be

repelled

in

order

to

act

again

as

more

or

less

stagnant

money.

In

order

that

the

mass

of

money,

actually

current,

may

constantly

saturate

the

absorbing

power

of

the

circulation,

it

is

necessary

that

the

quantity

of

gold

and

silver

in

a

country

be

greater

than

the

quantity

required

to

function

as

coin.This

condition

is

fulfilled

by

money

taking

the

form

of

hoards.

These

reserves

serve

as

conduits

for

the

supply

or

withdrawal

of

money

to

or

from

the

circulation,which

in

this

way

never

overflows

its

banks.46

B.

Means

of

Payment

In

the

simple

form

of

the

circulation

of

commodities

hitherto

considered,

we

found

a

given

value

always

presented

to

us

in

a

double

shape,

as

a

commodity

at

one

pole,

as

money

at

the

opposite

pole.

The

owners

of

commodities

came

therefore

into

contact

as

the

respective

representatives

of

what

were

already

equivalents.

But

with

the

development

of

circulation,conditions

arise

under

which

the

alienation

of

commodities

becomes

separated,

by

an

interval

of

time,

from

the

realisation

of

their

prices.

It

will

be

sufficient

to

indicate

the

most

simple

of

these

conditions.

One

sort

of

article

requires

a

longer,another

a

shorter

time

for

its

production.

Again,

the

production

of

different

commodities

depends

on

different

seasons

of

the

year.

One

sort

of

commodity

may

be

born

on

its

own

market

place,

another

has

to

make

a

long

journey

to

market.

Commodity-owner

No.

1,

may

therefore

be

ready

to

sell,

before

No.2

is

ready

to

buy.

When

the

same

transactions

are

continually

repeated

between

the

same

persons,

the

conditions

of

sale

are

regulated

in

accordance

with

the

conditions

of

production.

On

the

other

hand,

the

use

of

a

given

commodity,

of

a

house,

for

instance,

is

sold(in

common

parlance,

let)

for

a

definite

period.

Here,it

is

only

at

the

end

of

the

term

that

the

buyer

has

actually

received

the

use-value

of

the

commodity.

He

therefore

buys

it

before

he

pays

for

it.

The

vendor

sells

an

existing

commodity,

the

purchaser

buys

as

the

mere

representative

of

money,

or

rather

of

future

money.The

vendor

becomes

a

creditor,

the

purchaser

becomes

a

debtor.

Since

the

metamorphosis

of

commodities,or

the

development

of

their

value-form,

appears

here

under

a

new

aspect,

money

also

acquires

a

fresh

function;

it

becomes

the

means

of

payment.

The

character

of

creditor,

or

of

debtor,

results

here

from

the

simple

circulation.

The

change

in

the

form

of

that

circulation

stamps

buyer

and

seller

with

this

new

die.

At

first,

therefore,

these

new

parts

are

just

as

transient

and

alternating

as

those

of

seller

and

buyer,and

are

in

turns

played

by

the

same

actors.

But

the

opposition

is

not

nearly

so

pleasant,

and

is

far

more

capable

of

crystallisation.47The

same

characters

can,however,

be

assumed

independently

of

the

circulation

of

commodities.

The

class-struggles

of

the

ancient

world

took

the

form

chiefly

of

a

contest

between

debtors

and

creditors,

which

in

Rome

ended

in

the

ruin

of

the

plebeian

debtors.

They

were

displaced

by

slaves.

In

the

middle

ages

the

contest

ended

with

the

ruin

of

the

feudal

debtors,

who

lost

their

political

power

together

with

the

economic

basis

on

which

it

was

established.

Nevertheless,

the

money

relation

of

debtor

and

creditor

that

existed

at

these

two

periods

reflected

only

the

deeper-lying

antagonism

between

the

general

economic

conditions

of

existence

of

the

classes

in

question.

Let

us

return

to

the

circulation

of

commodities.The

appearance

of

the

two

equivalents,

commodities

and

money,

at

the

two

poles

of

the

process

of

sale,has

ceased

to

be

simultaneous.

The

money

functions

now,

first

as

a

measure

of

value

in

the

determination

of

the

price

of

the

commodity

sold;

the

price

fixed

by

the

contract

measures

the

obligation

of

the

debtor,

or

the

sum

of

money

that

he

has

to

pay

at

a

fixed

date.Secondly,

it

serves

as

an

ideal

means

of

purchase.Although

existing

only

in

the

promise

of

the

buyer

to

pay,

it

causes

the

commodity

to

change

hands.

It

is

not

before

the

day

fixed

for

payment

that

the

means

of

payment

actually

steps

into

circulation,

leaves

the

hand

of

the

buyer

for

that

of

the

seller.

The

circulating

medium

was

transformed

into

a

hoard,

because

the

process

stopped

short

after

the

first

phase,

because

the

converted

shape

of

the

commodity,

viz.,

the

money,

was

withdrawn

from

circulation.

The

means

of

payment

enters

the

circulation,

but

only

after

the

commodity

has

left

it.

The

money

is

no

longer

the

means

that

brings

about

the

process.

It

only

brings

it

to

a

close,

by

stepping

in

as

the

absolute

form

of

existence

of

exchange-value,

or

as

the

universal

commodity.

The

seller

turned

his

commodity

into

money,

in

order

thereby

to

satisfy

some

want,

the

hoarder

did

the

same

in

order

to

keep

his

commodity

in

its

money-shape,

and

the

debtor

in

order

to

be

able

to

pay;

if

he

do

not

pay,

his

goods

will

be

sold

by

the

sheriff.

The

value-form

of

commodities,

money,is

therefore

now

the

end

and

aim

of

a

sale,

and

that

owing

to

a

social

necessity

springing

out

of

the

process

of

circulation

itself.

The

buyer

converts

money

back

into

commodities

before

he

has

turned

commodities

into

money:

in

other

words,

he

achieves

the

second

metamorphosis

of

commodities

before

the

first.

The

seller's

commodity

circulates,

and

realises

its

price,

but

only

in

the

shape

of

a

legal

claim

upon

money.

It

is

converted

into

a

use

value

before

it

has

been

converted

into

money.

The

completion

of

its

first

metamorphosis

follows

only

at

a

later

period.48

The

obligations

falling

due

within

a

given

period,represent

the

sum

of

the

prices

of

the

commodities,the

sale

of

which

gave

rise

to

those

obligations.

The

quantity

of

gold

necessary

to

realise

this

sum,

depends,in

the

first

instance,

on

the

rapidity

of

currency

of

the

means

of

payment.

That

quantity

is

conditioned

by

two

circumstances:

first

the

relations

between

debtors

and

creditors

form

a

sort

of

chain,

in

such

a

way

that

A,

when

he

receives

money

from

his

debtor

B,straightway

hands

it

over

to

C

his

creditor,

and

so

on;the

second

circumstance

is

the

length

of

the

intervals

between

the

different

due-days

of

the

obligations.

The

continuous

chain

of

payments,

or

retarded

first

metamorphoses,

is

essentially

different

from

that

interlacing

of

the

series

of

metamorphoses

which

we

considered

on

a

former

page.

By

the

currency

of

the

circulating

medium,

the

connexion

between

buyers

and

sellers,

is

not

merely

expressed.

This

connexion

is

originated

by,

and

exists

in,

the

circulation

alone.Contrariwise,

the

movement

of

the

means

of

payment

expresses

a

social

relation

that

was

in

existence

long

before.

The

fact

that

a

number

of

sales

take

place

simultaneously,

and

side

by

side,

limits

the

extent

to

which

coin

can

be

replaced

by

the

rapidity

of

currency.

On

the

other

hand,

this

fact

is

a

new

lever

in

economising

the

means

of

payment.

In

proportion

as

payments

are

concentrated

at

one

spot,

special

institutions

and

methods

are

developed

for

their

liquidation.

Such

in

the

middle

ages

were

the

virements

at

Lyons.

The

debts

due

to

A

from

B,

to

B

from

C,

to

C

from

A,

and

so

on,

have

only

to

be

confronted

with

each

other,

in

order

to

annul

each

other

to

a

certain

extent

like

positive

and

negative

quantities.

There

thus

remains

only

a

single

balance

to

pay.

The

greater

the

amount

of

the

payments

concentrated,

the

less

is

this

balance

relatively

to

that

amount,

and

the

less

is

the

mass

of

the

means

of

payment

in

circulation.

The

function

of

money

as

the

means

of

payment

implies

a

contradiction

without

a

terminus

medius.

In

so

far

as

the

payments

balance

one

another,

money

functions

only

ideally

as

money

of

account,

as

a

measure

of

value.

In

so

far

as

actual

payments

have

to

be

made,

money

does

not

serve

as

a

circulating

medium,

as

a

mere

transient

agent

in

the

interchange

of

products,

but

as

the

individual

incarnation

of

social

labour,

as

the

independent

form

of

existence

of

exchange-value,

as

the

universal

commodity.

This

contradiction

comes

to

a

head

in

those

phases

of

industrial

and

commercial

crises

which

are

known

as

monetary

crises.49Such

a

crisis

occurs

only

where

the

ever-lengthening

chain

of

payments,

and

an

artificial

system

of

settling

them,

has

been

fully

developed.Whenever

there

is

a

general

and

extensive

disturbance

of

this

mechanism,

no

matter

what

its

cause,

money

becomes

suddenly

and

immediately

transformed,from

its

merely

ideal

shape

of

money

of

account,into

hard

cash.

Profane

commodities

can

no

longer

replace

it.

The

use-value

of

commodities

becomes

valueless,

and

their

value

vanishes

in

the

presence

of

its

own

independent

form.

On

the

eve

of

the

crisis,

the

bourgeois,

with

the

self-sufficiency

that

springs

from

intoxicating

prosperity,

declares

money

to

be

a

vain

imagination.

Commodities

alone

are

money.

But

now

the

cry

is

everywhere:

money

alone

is

a

commodity!As

the

hart

pants

after

fresh

water,

so

pants

his

soul

after

money,

the

only

wealth.50In

a

crisis,

the

antithesis

between

commodities

and

their

value

form,

money,

becomes

heightened

into

an

absolute

contradiction.

Hence,

in

such

events,

the

form

under

which

money

appears

is

of

no

importance.

The

money

famine

continues,

whether

payments

have

to

be

made

in

gold

or

in

credit

money

such

as

bank-notes.51

If

we

now

consider

the

sum

total

of

the

money

current

during

a

given

period,

we

shall

find

that,

given

the

rapidity

of

currency

of

the

circulating

medium

and

of

the

means

of

payment,

it

is

equal

to

the

sum

of

the

prices

to

be

realised,

plus

the

sum

of

the

payments

falling

due,

minus

the

payments

that

balance

each

other,

minus

finally

the

number

of

circuits

in

which

the

same

piece

of

coin

serves

in

turn

as

means

of

circulation

and

of

payment.

Hence,

even

when

prices,rapidity

of

currency,

and

the

extent

of

the

economy

in

payments,

are

given,

the

quantity

of

money

current

and

the

mass

of

commodities

circulating

during

a

given

period,

such

as

a

day,

no

longer

correspond.Money

that

represents

commodities

long

withdrawn

from

circulation,

continues

to

be

current.

Commodities

circulate,

whose

equivalent

in

money

will

not

appear

on

the

scene

till

some

future

day.

Moreover,

the

debts

contracted

each

day,

and

the

payments

falling

due

on

the

same

day,

are

quite

incommensurable

quantities.52

Credit-money

springs

directly

out

of

the

function

of

money

as

a

means

of

payment.

Certificates

of

the

debts

owing

for

the

purchased

commodities

circulate

for

the

purpose

of

transferring

those

debts

to

others.On

the

other

hand,

to

the

same

extent

as

the

system

of

credit

is

extended,

so

is

the

function

of

money

as

a

means

of

payment.

In

that

character

it

takes

various

forms

peculiar

to

itself

under

which

it

makes

itself

at

home

in

the

sphere

of

great

commercial

transactions.Gold

and

silver

coin,

on

the

other

hand,

are

mostly

relegated

to

the

sphere

of

retail

trade.53

When

the

production

of

commodities

has

sufficiently

extended

itself,

money

begins

to

serve

as

the

means

of

payment

beyond

the

sphere

of

the

circulation

of

commodities.

It

becomes

the

commodity

that

is

the

universal

subject-matter

of

all

contracts.54Rents,

taxes,

and

such

like

payments

are

transformed

from

payments

in

kind

into

money

payments.

To

what

extent

this

transformation

depends

upon

the

general

conditions

of

production,

is

shown,

to

take

one

example,

by

the

fact

that

the

Roman

Empire

twice

failed

in

its

attempt

to

levy

all

contributions

in

money.

The

unspeakable

misery

of

the

French

agricultural

population

under

Louis

XIV.,

a

misery

so

eloquently

denounced

by

Boisguillebert,

Marshal

Vauban,

and

others,

was

due

not

only

to

the

weight

of

the

taxes,

but

also

to

the

conversion

of

taxes

in

kind

into

money

taxes.55In

Asia,

on

the

other

hand,

the

fact

that

state

taxes

are

chiefly

composed

of

rents

payable

in

kind,

depends

on

conditions

of

production

that

are

reproduced

with

the

regularity

of

natural

phenomena.And

this

mode

of

payment

tends

in

its

turn

to

maintain

the

ancient

form

of

production.

It

is

one

of

the

secrets

of

the

conservation

of

the

Ottoman

Empire.

If

the

foreign

trade,

forced

upon

Japan

by

Europeans,

should

lead

to

the

substitution

of

money

rents

for

rents

in

kind,

it

will

be

all

up

with

the

exemplary

agriculture

of

that

country.

The

narrow

economic

conditions

under

which

that

agriculture

is

carried

on,

will

be

swept

away.

In

every

country,

certain

days

of

the

year

become

by

habit

recognised

settling

days

for

various

large

and

recurrent

payments.

These

dates

depend,

apart

from

other

revolutions

in

the

wheel

of

reproduction,on

conditions

closely

connected

with

the

seasons.They

also

regulate

the

dates

for

payments

that

have

no

direct

connexion

with

the

circulation

of

commodities

such

as

taxes,

rents,

and

so

on.

The

quantity

of

money

requisite

to

make

the

payments,

falling

due

on

those

dates

all

over

the

country,

causes

periodical,

though

merely

superficial,

perturbations

in

the

economy

of

the

medium

of

payment.56

From

the

law

of

the

rapidity

of

currency

of

the

means

of

payment,

it

follows

that

the

quantity

of

the

means

of

payment

required

for

all

periodical

payments,

whatever

their

source,

is

in

inverse

57proportion

to

the

length

of

their

periods.58

The

development

of

money

into

a

medium

of

payment

makes

it

necessary

to

accumulate

money

against

the

dates

fixed

for

the

payment

of

the

sums

owing.

While

hoarding,

as

a

distinct

mode

of

acquiring

riches,

vanishes

with

the

progress

of

civil

society,

the

formation

of

reserves

of

the

means

of

payment

grows

with

that

progress.

C.

Universal

Money

When

money

leaves

the

home

sphere

of

circulation,it

strips

off

the

local

garbs

which

it

there

assumes,of

a

standard

of

prices,

of

coin,

of

tokens,

and

of

a

symbol

of

value,

and

returns

to

its

original

form

of

bullion.

In

the

trade

between

the

markets

of

the

world,

the

value

of

commodities

is

expressed

so

as

to

be

universally

recognised.

Hence

their

independent

value-form

also,

in

these

cases,

confronts

them

under

the

shape

of

universal

money.

It

is

only

in

the

markets

of

the

world

that

money

acquires

to

the

full

extent

the

character

of

the

commodity

whose

bodily

form

is

also

the

immediate

social

incarnation

of

human

labour

in

the

abstract.

Its

real

mode

of

existence

in

this

sphere

adequately

corresponds

to

its

ideal

concept.

Within

the

sphere

of

home

circulation,

there

can

be

but

one

commodity

which,

by

serving

as

a

measure

of

value,

becomes

money.

In

the

markets

of

the

world

a

double

measure

of

value

holds

sway,

gold

and

silver.59

Money

of

the

world

serves

as

the

universal

medium

of

payment,

as

the

universal

means

of

purchasing,and

as

the

universally

recognised

embodiment

of

all

wealth.

Its

function

as

a

means

of

payment

in

the

settling

of

international

balances

is

its

chief

one.Hence

the

watchword

of

the

mercantilists,

balance

of

trade.60Gold

and

silver

serve

as

international

means

of

purchasing

chiefly

and

necessarily

in

those

periods

when

the

customary

equilibrium

in

the

interchange

of

products

between

different

nations

is

suddenly

disturbed.

And

lastly,

it

serves

as

the

universally

recognised

embodiment

of

social

wealth,

whenever

the

question

is

not

of

buying

or

paying,

but

of

transferring

wealth

from

one

country

to

another,

and

whenever

this

transference

in

the

form

of

commodities

is

rendered

impossible,

either

by

special

conjunctures

in

the

markets

or

by

the

purpose

itself

that

is

intended.61

Just

as

every

country

needs

a

reserve

of

money

for

its

home

circulation

so,

too,

it

requires

one

for

external

circulation

in

the

markets

of

the

world.

The

functions

of

hoards,

therefore,

arise

in

part

out

of

the

function

of

money,

as

the

medium

of

the

home

circulation

and

home

payments,

and

in

part

out

of

its

function

of

money

of

the

world.62For

this

latter

function,

the

genuine

money-commodity,

actual

gold

and

silver,

is

necessary.

On

that

account,

Sir

James

Steuart,

in

order

to

distinguish

them

from

their

purely

local

substitutes,calls

gold

and

silver

\"money

of

the

world.\"

The

current

of

the

stream

of

gold

and

silver

is

a

double

one.

On

the

one

hand,

it

spreads

itself

from

its

sources

over

all

the

markets

of

the

world,

in

order

to

become

absorbed,

to

various

extents,

into

the

different

national

spheres

of

circulation,

to

fill

the

conduits

of

currency,

to

replace

abraded

gold

and

silver

coins,to

supply

the

material

of

articles

of

luxury,

and

to

petrify

into

hoards.63This

first

current

is

started

by

the

countries

that

exchange

their

labour,

realised

in

commodities,

for

the

labour

embodied

in

the

precious

metals

by

gold

and

silver-producing

countries.

On

the

other

hand,

there

is

a

continual

flowing

backwards

and

forwards

of

gold

and

silver

between

the

different

national

spheres

of

circulation,

a

current

whose

motion

depends

on

the

ceaseless

fluctuations

in

the

course

of

exchange.64

Countries

in

which

the

bourgeois

form

of

production

is

developed

to

a

certain

extent,

limit

the

hoards

concentrated

in

the

strong

rooms

of

the

banks

to

the

minimum

required

for

the

proper

performance

of

their

peculiar

functions.65Whenever

these

hoards

are

strikingly

above

their

average

level,

it

is,

with

some

exceptions,

an

indication

of

stagnation

in

the

circulation

of

commodities,

of

an

interruption

in

the

even

flow

of

their

metamorphoses.66

NOTES:

1The

question

—

Why

does

not

money

directly

represent

labour-time,

so

that

a

piece

of

paper

may

represent,

for

instance,

x

hours'

labour,

is

at

bottom

the

same

as

the

question

why,

given

the

production

of

commodities,

must

products

take

the

form

of

commodities

This

is

evident,

since

their

taking

the

form

of

commodities

implies

their

differentiation

into

commodities

and

money.

Or,

why

cannot

private

labour—

labour

for

the

account

of

private

individuals

—

be

treated

as

its

opposite,

immediate

social

labour

I

have

elsewhere

examined

thoroughly

the

Utopian

idea

of

\"labour-money\"

in

a

society

founded

on

the

production

of

commodities

(l.

c.,

p.

61,seq.).

On

this

point

I

will

only

say

further,

that

Owen's

\"labour

money,\"

for

instance,

is

no

more

\"money\"

than

a

ticket

for

the

theatre.

Owen

pre-supposes

directly

associated

labour,

a

form

of

production

that

is

entirely

inconsistent

with

the

production

of

commodities.

The

certificate

of

labour

is

merely

evidence

of

the

part

taken

by

the

individual

in

the

common

labour,

and

of

his

right

to

a

certain

portion

of

the

common

produce

destined

for

consumption.

But

it

never

enters

into

Owen's

head

to

pre

suppose

the

production

of

commodities,

and

at

the

same

time,

by

juggling

with

money,

to

try

to

evade

the

necessary

conditions

of

that

production.

2Savages

and

half-civilised

races

use

the

tongue

differently.Captain

Parry

says

of

the

inhabitants

on

the

west

coast

of

Baffin's

Bay:

\"In

this

case

(he

refers

to

barter)

they

licked

it(the

thing

represented

to

them)

twice

to

their

tongues,

after

which

they

seemed

to

consider

the

bargain

satisfactorily

concluded.\"

In

the

same

way,

the

Eastern

Esquimaux

licked

the

articles

they

received

in

exchange.

If

the

tongue

is

thus

used

in

the

North

as

the

organ

of

appropriation,

no

wonder

that,in

the

South,

the

stomach

serves

as

the

organ

of

accumulated

property,

and

that

a

Kaffir

estimates

the

wealth

of

a

man

by

the

size

of

his

belly.

That

the

Kaffirs

know

what

they

are

about

is

shown

by

the

following:

at

the

same

time

that

the

official

British

Health

Report

of

1864

disclosed

the

deficiency

of

fat

forming

food

among

a

large

part

of

the

working-class,

a

certain

Dr.

Harvey

(not,

however,

the

celebrated

discoverer

of

the

circulation

of

the

blood),

made

a

good

thing

by

advertising

recipes

for

reducing

the

superfluous

fat

of

the

bourgeoisie

and

aristocracy.

3See

Karl

Marx:

\"Zur

Kritik,

&c.\"

\"Theorien

von

der

Masseinheit

des

Geldes,\"

p.

53,

seq.

4\"Wherever

gold

and

silver

have

by

law

been

made

to

perform

the

function

of

money

or

of

a

measure

of

value

side

by

side,

it

has

always

been

tried,

but

in

vain,

to

treat

them

as

one

and

the

same

material.

To

assume

that

there

is

an

invariable

ratio

between

the

quantities

of

gold

and

silver

in

which

a

given

quantity

of

labour-time

is

incorporated,

is

to

assume

in

fact,that

gold

and

silver

are

of

one

and

the

same

material,

and

that

a

given

mass

of

the

less

valuable

metal,

silver,

is

a

constant

fraction

of

a

given

mass

of

gold.

From

the

reign

of

Edward

III.

to

the

time

of

George

II.,

the

history

of

money

in

England

consists

of

one

long

series

of

perturbations

caused

by

the

clashing

of

the

legally

fixed

ratio

between

the

values

of

gold

and

silver,

with

the

fluctuations

in

their

real

values.

At

one

time

gold

was

too

high,

at

another,

silver.

The

metal

that

for

the

time

being

was

estimated

below

its

value,

was

withdrawn

from

circulation,

mated

and

exported.

The

ratio

between

the

two

metals

was

then

again

altered

by

law,

but

the

new

nominal

ratio

soon

came

into

conflict

again

with

the

real

one.

In

our

own

times,

the

slight

and

transient

fall

in

the

value

of

gold

compared

with

silver,

which

was

a

consequence

of

the

Indo

Chinese

demand

for

silver,

produced

on

a

far

more

extended

scale

in

France

the

same

phenomena,

export

of

silver,

and

its

expulsion

from

circulation

by

gold.

During

the

years

1855,1856

and

1857,

the

excess

in

France

of

gold-imports

over

gold

exports

amounted

to

￡41,580,000,

while

the

excess

of

silver

exports

over

silver-imports

was

￡14,704,000.

In

fact,

in

those

countries

in

which

both

metals

are

legally

measures

of

value,and

therefore

both

legal

tender,

so

that

everyone

has

the

option

of

paying

in

either

metal,

the

metal

that

rises

in

value

is

at

a

premium,

and,

like

every

other

commodity,

measures

its

price

in

the

over-estimated

metal

which

alone

serves

in

reality

as

the

standard

of

value.

The

result

of

all

experience

and

history

with

regard

to

this

equation

is

simply

that,

where

two

commodities

perform

by

law

the

functions

of

a

measure

of

value,

in

practice

one

alone

maintains

that

position.\"

(Karl

Marx,

l.c.,

pp.

52,53.)

5The

peculiar

circumstance,

that

while

the

ounce

of

gold

serves

in

England

as

the

unit

of

the

standard

of

money,

the

pound

sterling

does

not

form

an

aliquot

part

of

it,

has

been

explained

as

follows:

\"Our

coinage

was

originally

adapted

to

the

employment

of

silver

only,

hence,

an

ounce

of

silver

can

always

be

divided

into

a

certain

adequate

number

of

pieces

of

coin,

but

as

gold

was

introduced

at

a

later

period

into

a

coinage

adapted

only

to

silver,

an

ounce

of

gold

cannot

be

coined

into

an

aliquot

number

of

pieces.\"

Maclaren,

\"A

Sketch

of

the

History

of

the

Currency.\"

London,

1858,

p.

16.

6With

English

writers

the

confusion

between

measure

of

value

and

standard

of

price

(standard

of

value)

is

indescribable.Their

functions,

as

well

as

their

names,

are

constantly

interchanged.

7Moreover,

it

has

not

general

historical

validity.

8It

is

thus

that

the

pound

sterling

in

English

denotes

less

than

one-third

of

its

original

weight;

the

pound

Scot,

before

the

union,

only

1-36th;

the

French

livre,

1-74th;

the

Spanish

maravedi,

less

than

1-1,000th;

and

the

Portuguese

rei

a

still

smaller

fraction.

9\"Le

monete

le

quali

oggi

sono

ideal,

sono

le

pi

antiche

d'ogni

nazione,

e

tutte

furono

un

tempo

real,

e

perche

erano

reali

con

esse

si

contava\"

[\"The

coins

which

today

are

ideal

are

the

oldest

coins

of

every

nation,

and

all

of

them

were

once

real,

and

precisely

because

they

were

real

they

were

used

for

calculation\"]

(Galiani:

Della

moneta,

l.c.,

p.

153.)

10David

Urquhart

remarks

in

his

\"Familiar

Words\"

on

the

monstrosity

(!)

that

now-a-days

a

pound

(sterling),

which

is

the

unit

of

the

English

standard

of

money,

is

equal

to

about

a

quarter

of

an

ounce

of

gold.

\"This

is

falsifying

a

measure,

not

establishing

a

standard.\"

He

sees

in

this

\"false

denomination\"of

the

weight

of

gold,

as

in

everything

else,

the

falsifying

hand

of

civilisation.

11When

Anacharsis

was

asked

for

what

purposes

the

Greeks

used

money,

he

replied,

\"For

reckoning.\"

(Ashen.

Deipn.

1.

iv.49

v.

2.

ed.

Schweighauser,

1802.)