| OCR Text |
Show 52 ON THE NATURE. AND [en. IT. "vorth ~rhile to reject it; and it need on 1 y be o bserved that as the application of the "'or<l Yalue in this way is very 111uch less frequent than in th other, it should never appear alone, but ·hould always be marked by the addition, in use. Value in exchange i founded, a the t nn . e 111 to in1ply1 • on the ,vill and po\ver to cxrhang on co1nn1odity for another. It docs not dep nd 1ncrely upon the scarcity in 'vhich con1n1odities xist, nor npon the inequality of their distribution; but upon the circun1stance of their not bein?· eli tribut d according to the \Vilis and po,vcrs of individual , or in such quCllutities to each, as the \vills an l po\V r of individuals vvill enable the1n ulti1nately to effect by means of exchanges. If nature were to distribute, in the first instance al! her goods precisely as they are ultimately li - tnbuted previous to consumption, there would be no question of exchanges or exchangeable value, p.nd yet the n1ass of commodities 'vould both cxi t in a degree of scarcity and be very unequaUv di-vided. " .In this distribution. one tnan Inight have only btead, and another ven1son and claret in addition to bread. The man ,vho had only bteacl n1io·ht \Vish to nlake an exchange, but 'vould not have the po\~er, and the man \V ho had venison and claret bestdes bread \Vould have the po\ver to Inake an exchange, but not the ~vis h. Under these circunlstances the con1~1odities possessed by each 'vou lcl not be brought lnto contact, and the relative value of,bread and. Yenison would never be detertnincd. fo detenntnc this, it is necessary that the po, scs- SEC. I.] 1\IEAbUH.ES OF VALUE. 53 sors of venison should want bread, as \vcll as that the possessors of bread should want venison, and \vhen this was the case, venison and bread \Vould soon be brought into con1parison \vith each other, and the means afforded of ascertaining their relative values .. Every exchange, therefore, must in~:Jly, not only the power and ,vill to give some article in exchange for one 1nore "vanted, but a reciprocal denland in the party possessing the article "ranted, for the article proposed to be exchanged for it. When this reciprocal den1and exists, the rate at which the exchange is n1ade, or the portion of one commodity \vhich is given for an assigned portion of the other, w-ill depend upon the relative estimation in \Vhich they are held by the parties, founded on the desire to possess, and the djfficulty or facility of procuring possession. 0\ving to the necessary difference of the desires and po,vers of individuals, it is probable that the eon tracts thus n1ade were in the first instance very different fro1n each other. An1ong some individuals it n1ight be agreed to give six pounds of bread for a pound of venison) and an1ong others only t\vo. But the n1an \vho vvas ready and \villing to give six pounds of bread for a pound of venison, if he heard of a person at a little distance who would take two pounds for the same quantity, would of course not continue to give six; and the man who \Vould consent to give a pound of venison for only two pounds of bread, if he could any where else obtain six, 'vould not continue to tnake an exchange fro1n which he derived onl~ two .. . 'ES |
