of rule and ordinance[1] in the most important States, and I still think this heuristic method the best for lectures.
One of my pupils, Karl Helfferich, has far outstripped me in this art; for clearness of construction his works cannot be praised too highly. Another pupil, Philipp Kalkmann, by his studies on England, Holland and Switzerland, has greatly increased my knowledge. I would gladly have had him with me as an associate, had he not adopted another profession.
In the autumn of 1895, in a course of lectures in Berlin, I put forward my views fully for the first time, laying down: that the money of a State is not what is of compulsory general acceptance, but what is accepted at the public pay offices; and that the standard is not chosen for any properties of the metals, but for the deliberate purpose of influencing exchanges with the commercially important neighbouring States.
Soon after this Georg Simmel brought out his able book on the Philosophy of Money (Leipzig, 1900). As it treats only of the sociological side of currency, I do nob need to regard my work as competing with his. T feel myself nearer to Otto Heyn, whose work (1894) is entitled Paper Standard with a Gold Reserve for Foreign Trade (Papierwahrung mit Goldreserve fiir den Auslandsverkehr). It was a book that appealed to public men and deserved more attention
- ↑ Das Pragmatische.
