business. Within the range of business transactions this ulterior end does not necessarily come into view, at least not as a motive that guides the transactions from day to day. The matter is not so conceived in business transactiotiH, It does not so apjiear on the face ol the negotiable instrumenls, it is not in this manner that the money onU enters into the ruling habiu of thought of business men.
to variation on the part of the money metals as to a variation on the part of the articles whose prices fluctuate. In so far as the distinction so made between variations in the one or the other member of a value ratio has a meaning — which it is not always clear that it has — it does not touch the argument. It is a matter of common notoriety, which has also hail the benefit of reiterated statistical proof, that, aa measured, for instance, in terms of livelihood or of labor, the value of money has varied incontinently throughout the course of history.
But in the routine of business throughout the nineteenth century the assumed stability of the money unit has served as an axiomatic principle, in spite of facts which have from time to time shown the falsity of that assumption.'
The all-dominating issue in business is the question of gain and loss. Gain and loss is a question
' Still, latterly, in the traffic of some of the more wido-awiko buHiDesB men, account ta practically takea of tbe variations of the unit of value. What may be the future effects of habitual and iiiuontinent variations of the unit, such as prevail In the present, ia of course Impoasible to foretell. These variations seem due malaly to the ezteit. ■lrt> prevalence of credit rulaUoDB ; and the full development of credit nlatlona In husineaa is