happiness of the human family than in any other science whatever." His criticism on the recorded definition of value marches on the same line with that here given, the line of esteem. Yet he ultimately landed himself in an identification of value with utility, when he stated "value to be that property which creates in man a desire to possess the article containing it."

Is it presumptuous to believe that this problem is not insoluble-that a satisfactory solution may yet be hoped for? A word so deeply planted in the every day language of men must surely admit of some acceptable explanation; whilst its acknowledged importance warrants every honest effort to reach the end desired. I must venture on such an attempt, and submit it to public consideration and judgment.

Adam Smith's declaration, that there is a value in use and a value in exchange, covers the whole ground. There are things which possess value which are not saleable, for which no one will give anything in exchange; and there are other valuable things which can be exchanged by a sale for money or by barter. Of the first kind are Robinson Crusoe's gun, which, beyond all doubt, he valued greatly, but not for any purpose of exchange. He had no market. The thought of exchanging the gun could not occur to him. Such also is a flower gathered under circumstances of great interest, the toy of a departed child, the extremely valuable horse of a Turcoman, which he is bound never to sell, the aged stump of a decayed oak, and many other similar things. It cannot be denied that the term value is daily applied to them with complete correctness of language. They are valued, often most

highly. No money could procure them since they are never offered for sale. A Turcoman would rather die than commit the sacrilege of selling his horse.

In this class figure the oft-quoted instances of unsaleable water and air. The supposition that a thirsty man sets no value on a glass of water which he took up out of a running stream would be preposterous. It would bring down ridicule on him who maintained it. What matters it that such valuable things cost nothing? Such a thought never presents itself to their valuers. Their want of price only means that no effort or labour is needed for their acquisition; but does it imply that their owners are indifferent to such possessions, because they cannot be sold? that they would experience no sense of loss if deprived of them? that the thirsty man does not appreciate the refreshing draught of the water which has cost nothing? Such things are felt to be valuable, and some meaning of the word value must be found for them. The presumption is irresistible that this value I will be the same in kind and essence with the value which belongs to things capable of being exchanged.

Value is pronounced to be a relative expression, and the assertion is true. But what is the relation? between what bodies does it exist? Professor Perry refuses to admit that value exists independently of exchange. "Ten cents. had the power of purchasing my pencil, and my pencil had the power of purchasing ten cents. A similar transaction first introduced the idea (of value) in the West." But this is palpably untrue of the application of the term value to the cases just cited. There is no thought of exchange in them. The relation implied in value when such unexchangeable things are

spoken of is therefore not to a commodity, but to one who values, to a feeling of esteem, to a judgment in the human mind. This reveals the secret of that very common word value. It expresses a feeling, a sense of attachment, of affection for a thing, a caring for it, a desire to possess it, an intention, more or less strong, to retain it in possession.

It cannot be denied that this sense of the word suits perfectly all the cases of value in use. Every such thing is the object of value, because they all have a hold on the feeling of their owners or would-be owners. They are all consequently valuable. They excite value, attachment, esteem in the minds of their owners. The thirsty man values the glass of water, which costs him nothing, and which he could, if spilled, instantly replace out of the brook. He will exclaim how grateful it is to him.

If now we analyse the process of exchanging we shall find this idea of value wielding a decisive influence on its results. Value, as feeling, governs the process. It determines whether there shall be an exchange, and on what terms. Market-value, the quantity of money or things which an article can command, is a consequence, an effect. The estimation in valuing has completed its task, and the quantities of the articles exchanged have been settled. Each of these quantities is a marketvalue, the product of the decisions made by the feelings of the exchangers, their respective feelings of value.

For instance, a fine sportsman is in want of a good hunter. He is offered such a horse by a dealer at a price of three hundred guineas. The sportsman likes the horse and is eager to purchase him, but he finds the price

uncomfortably high for his means, or in excess of his estimate of the horse's quality. Bargaining takes place, and ultimately the horse changes owners at two hundred and fifty guineas. Professor Perry has admirably pointed out, that in such a transaction, as indeed in every exchange, every sale, two desires and two efforts are at work. To these must be added two satisfactions. The sale is thus the result of six forces three on each side, all of them mental, all occupied in determining the strength of the feeling, I value, in the minds of two persons. The sportsman desires the horse and the dealer money, or which is the reality always underlying money, those commodities or services which the money will be able to purchase for him. Each man has to make an effort; the one to part with his horse, the other with his money. Lastly, on a comparison of these four feelings, working by pairs on each side, the sportsman comes to the conclusion that he has a higher feeling or esteem for the horse than for two hundred and fifty guineas. The dealer arrives at the opposite sentiment, and the exchange is accomplished. The result is the transfer of two properties, and two satisfactions, one in each of the minds of the buyer and of the seller. Here the nature of value is plainly discerned, the esteem, or caring for, felt for two things in the mind of each of two persons. Both value both the things exchanged. Each values more and prefers to have the thing which the other possesses than that which he himself holds. Each calculates, consciously or not, the severity of the effort he must make to obtain the object of his desire at the loss of what he must give away; and when all is

over each experiences a satisfaction on becoming the possessor of the article he values most. The bargaining itself is an antagonism of feelings, the sportsman struggling to buy the horse on such terms as will render the effort, the sacrifice endurable, the dealer striving to obtain money sufficient to reconcile him to the sale of his horse.

The same holds equally good of an exchange of services, or of a service against money. Professor Perry lays peculiar stress on the employment of the expression service in the place of commodities, but the difference is only one of detail. He admits that the man who supplies you with a barrel of apples has given in exchange a service equal to that of a physician who attends upon a fever. Quite true. The tailor who makes a coat for another man, or the manufacturer who wove the cloth does him a service, and it is that service that he is paid for. For all but an insignificant portion of purchases, the cost of articles exchanged is made up of payment for services, whether in the form of wages for labour or for the assistance of capital. All this is true, and it is highly important to study and understand this mechanism of trade. But the truth is equally expressed by speaking of the commodity itself. The coat sums up all the services rendered to produce it, and when all are counted up, their name is legion. From first to last, including the construction of tools and transport by sea and land, the services given to put a coat on a man's back would reckon up in thousands.

This explanation of the word value differs in essence from the sense attached to it in the expression that the value of a ton of iron is four pounds. The word here