In the last number of these Annals[G], I explained in a manner which I
consider definitive, the theoretical conception of comptabilism.
To this point of view it seems to me necessary to add a few words in
order to throw light on certain points which the first article did not
sufficiently bring out.
We have seen what is the use of money and to whom it is of use, we have
considered if it was indispensable. Gold and silver are not a «real
commodity» except when they take the form of useful objects, utensils,
works of art, etc., the possession of which produces enjoyment. Turned
into coin, they lose this character, they become an instrument, an
instrument recognised so far as indispensable for obtaining a real
commodity, be this commodity material or moral, by an operation which I
have designated under the general term of «transaction». Money is not
then a commodity in the true sense of the word; on the contrary it is
generally obtained by the surrender of a commodity.
It is solely in order to accomplish the «operation» of transaction that
money is needed, because this is the method, the means, the instrument
which custom has consecrated; and if another practicable method, means
or instrument were found in order to accomplish this operation money
would no longer be indispensable. Now, this is what comptabilism does.
It is essential to note here that the comptabilistic unities, francs,
marks, pounds, etc., would be derived from securities, and not, as
with money by the surrender of commodities, that in consequence these
unities would no longer have a value by themselves, but simply by the
things which they represented.
But apart from that, they could be with held or parted with, they could
be borrowed or lent, with or without interest, directly from man to
man, or by the medium of banking houses, exactly as in the case of
money.
And in fact, if the force of habit required, nothing would prevent
their being called money of account or comptabilistic money, since
apart from what has just been said as to the way of obtaining them
and their nature, nothing would be altered in the current methods,
everything would remain as to day both in the organisation of business
and of society. And all that might have been said, written or thought
until now in an opposite sense to the fore going considerations
should be held as contrary to the reality of the facts resulting from
comptabilism.
The conception of the comptabilistic system is one quite other than
that of the monetary system. There is not the smallest trace of this
second conception in the first; it becomes necessary to leave entirely
the one to understand the other. In a word the two conceptions mutually
exclude each other; the one is based upon _exchange_, the other upon
_accounts_, and the two systems derived rest thus on two essentially
different principles.
The examination of the theoretical side of the comptabilistic system
could not be undertaken through the ideas, nor from the point of
view derived from the monetary system. It is necessary first of all
to accustom oneself to think and speak of business, finances, etc.,
abstraction being made of every idea of money and to persuade oneself
that transactions--and by transactions I understand every operation,
whatever it may be, which gives rise at present to the use of money
or its equivalent--when finally analysed, only modify the ratio of
fortunes. If these ratios could be continuously recognised and fixed,
could be officially registered, money would lose its use. Indeed,
money put in circulation by whatsoever an operation is only a means of
granting to the one who receives it, the power to acquire subsequently
its equivalent, the other who has given the money having diminished by
this much this power as far as he is concerned.
Now the comptabilistic system in officially registering this power,
acquired on the one hand and diminished on the other, permits the afore
mentioned ratios being fixed, and realises entirely the part played
by money. Therefore it can entirely be substituted for the monetary
system. And let it be said, in its favour, that the power registered in
this system cannot itself be lessened by the fact of the fluctuations
in price of the metal, as actually now takes place. Moreover, the
necessity which exists at this present moment of surrendering
commodities to procure the monetary instrument indispensable in
transactions, would disappear.
It is evident that it might have been possible _theoretically_ to
pass directly from the regime of barter to the application of the
comptabilistic system, and if one admits that the conception of
this system could have been produced at this far distant epoch, and
have been thus used from the commencement,--which in the presence
of the laws of evolution of the human mind, could only be a pure
hypothesis--it must be immediately granted that the monetary idea
could not then have occurred to anyone--and even admitting, which
is impossible, that it had occurred all the same to someone, no one
would have dreamt of making use of it, so much in the presence of
comptabilism would the monetary system have seemed barbarous by its
illogical and inconvenient character.
Such are the theoretical considerations which it seems necessary to
insist upon.
But if there is a difficulty in comprehending the question from its
theoretical side, this difficulty disappears if approached from the
practical side.
This is what will be seen on examining the system which M. Hector
Denis has gone to study in Austria and which he proposes to realise in
Belgium.
All the post-offices in the Austrian Empire are in connection with
the Savings Bank, the central establishment of which is in Vienna and
which has become during the last few years a thoroughly comptabilistic
establishment, in this sense, that,--independent of its primitive aim,
it keeps the accounts of over thirty thousand who are affiliated and
who annually through this medium do business of which the figures are
above a thousand millions of florins.
The Savings Bank exacts from those persons who wish to transact
business through its medium, a fixed monetary deposit of 100 florins,
without relation therefore to the importance of the transactions which
they can effect; it opens for them an account and delivers them, upon
request, cheque books which serve to effect the payments which they
desire to make. All this is done by the intervention of any post-office
of the Empire.
Each time that a cheque is paid by an affiliated person, the Central
Office at Vienna is advised by post and returns immediately, also by
post, an extract of their account to the two persons concerned. Each
affiliated person's account is thus kept to date, and this as much for
the Central Bank as for the person affiliated.
Here then are thirty thousand persons who could at a stretch do
entirely without money--if their mutual relations were sufficient to
permit them to do so for all the necessaries of life, and this result
is obtained merely by the fact that an official establishment is
willing to undertake to keep the banking account. But it is seen that
these thirty thousand persons are but a select few in the mass of the
population, since the Savings Bank admits them to carry on transactions
merely upon the deposit of 100 florins, thus almost always at the risk
and peril of the transactors, as has always been the case so far in
regard to cheques. And it is evident that if it were desired to make
the system general, it would be necessary to adopt the principle of
comptabilism which would mean that the transactions were guaranteed by
the property of the persons affiliated.
Here then, as I said, has the Savings Bank of Vienna become up to
a certain point a comptabilistic establishment. I may add that the
dangers that might threaten this institution, as far as it actually
works, spring from its being not entirely comptabilistic, in so far as
it still retains the metallic basis.
The deposits received are not left unproductive, they are placed in
funds, public or otherwise.
Let a political crisis occur which should cause a rush of withdrawals
of these deposits from the Bank and it would be exposed to the greatest
dangers. Solely because the institution is based upon current ideas and
not upon the comptabilistic system.
In effect, in this latter system, the individual who is affiliated does
not make a deposit of monetary unities having a value in themselves,
he gives as a pledge a commodity, and according to the value of this
commodity he is permitted to make use of more or less unities.
Here then is the ground on which the institution ought to be based.
Under these conditions deposits are not necessary. The affiliated
person will give a pledge in exchange for his cheque book. The
registers of the Central Savings Bank will declare that he is permitted
to carry on transactions with _x_ unities, and his cheques will be
accepted, as long as he does not go beyond this figure.
In place of a deposit having a value of its own, there is the simply
writing down, the entry of a right, and the dangers of the present
system would be avoided.
The entry and the writing down constitute the ideal realization of
the comptabilistic system. They lead one to understand that the
transactional unities have only a fictitious value, that they serve
solely to measure the transactional value of things, that their system
is thus dependant on the existence of these things.
Ideally speaking, all the transactions, that is to say the changes in
the fortunes of individuals, may be written down, may be entered, for
example in bank books.
But concerning the practical side, although the entry remains the ideal
conception, it may be that the necessities of human relations require
other methods of a more convenient nature. This is a side of the
question upon which we hope soon to set forth some solutions, but which
can be discussed without the theoretical side of comptabilism being
introduced.