lue　of　all　goods　that　come　under　the　dominion　of　that　leveling　influence。　It　determines　the　value　of　the　products　as　well　as　the　value　of　the　productive　power；　which　is　represented　by　the　cost。　　　　　　The　representatives　of　the　English　theory　have　chosen　the　figure　of　the　two　blades　of　a　pair　of　shears；　in　order　to　show　the　opposition　between　the　English　and　Austrian　conception　of　the　law　of　cost。　I　gladly　follow　them　in　the　use　of　this　figure　but　with　the　conviction　that　the　interpretation　which　my　English　colleague　have　given　to　it；　must　be　supplemented　as　follows：　　　　　　In　the　case　of　freely　reproducible　goods；　it　is　undoubtedly　true　that　the　price　is　fixed　at　that　point　where　the　money　marginal　utility　of　the　commodity　to　those　desiring　to　purchase　it　crosses　the　line　of　the　costs。　In　our　example；　the　last　purchaser　of　wool　will　be　the　one　whose　valuation　will　correspond　with　the　amount　of　the　cost；　or　with　eighty　cents。　In　this　case　it　is　entirely　correct　to　say　that　utility　（relative　marginal　utility　for　those　desiring　to　purchase）　and　cost　operate　together　in　the　determination　of　price；　like　the　two　blade　of　a　pair　of　shears。　　　　　　But　now　follows　the　unavoidable　question：　What　determine　the　amount　of　this　cost？　The　amount　of　the　cost　is　identical　with　the　value　of　the　productive　power；　and；　as　a　rule；　is　determined　by　the　money　marginal　utility　of　this　productive　power。　This；　of　course；　has　reference　to　the　existing　conditions　of　the　demand　for　and　supply　of　this　productive　power　in　the　various　branches　of　production。　If　in　the　above　formula　we　substitute　for　〃cost〃　this　explanation　of　cost；　we　would　have　the　following：　〃The　price　of　a　definite　specie　of　freely　reproducible　goods　fixes　itself　in　the　long　run　at　that　point　where　the　money　marginal　utility；　for　those　who　desire　to　purchase　these　products；　intersects　the　money　marginal　utility　of　all　those　who　desire　to　purchase　in　the　other　communicating　branches　of　production。〃　　　　　The　figure　of　the　two　blade　of　a　pair　of　shears　still　holds　good。　One　of　the　two　blade；　whose　coming　together　determine　the　height　of　the　price　of　any　species　of　product；　is　in　truth　the　marginal　utility　of　this　particular　product。　The　other；　which　we　are　wont　to　call　〃cost；〃　is　the　marginal　utility　of　the　products　of　other　communicating　branches　of　production。　Or；　according　to　Wieser；　the　marginal　utility　of　〃production　related　goods〃　（productionsverwandten　Guter）。　It　is；　therefore；　utility　and　not　disutility　which；　as　well　on　the　side　of　supply　as　of　demand；　determine　the　height　of　the　price。　This；　too；　even　where　the　so…called　law　of　cost　plays　its　role　in　giving　value　to　goods。　Jevons；　therefore；　did　not　exaggerate　the　importance　of　the　one　side；　but　came　very　near　the　truth　when　he　said　〃value　depends　entirely　upon　utility。〃　　　　　Almost；　but　not　quite　entirely；　for　as　I　have　endeavored　to　show；　and　as　Jevons　well　knew；　disutility　plays　a　certain　part　in　the　determination　of　value。　A　part；　however；　which；　in　our　actual　economical　conditions；　is　quantitatively　unimportant。　It　occurs　in　full　force　only；　in　the　case　of　the　few　and　unimportant　products　of　our　leisure　hours。　For　the　great　mass　of　products　which　are　the　outcome　of　our　regular　occupation；　this　disutility　either　does　not　appear；　or　is　only　a　very　weak　and　remote　element　in　the　complex　standard　that　determine　the〃　height　of　the　cost。〃（42*）　If　we　were　to　put　this　roughly　into　figure；　we　might　say　that　the　ten　parts　of　that　blade　which　represents　the　demand　consist　entirely　of　utility；　while　of　the　blade　which　represents　the　〃cost〃；　nine　parts　are　utility　and　only　one　part　disutility。　On　the　whole　then　value　depends　nineteen…twentieths　on　utility；　and　only　one…twentieth　on　disutility。　　　　　　We　must　now　consider　a　circumstance；　which　thus　far　in　our　argument　we　have　intentionally　ignored。　Up　to　this　point　we　have　confined　ourselves　to　those　conceptions　of　the　law　of　cost　which　come　nearest　to　harmonizing　with　those　of　our　opponents；　namely；　those　which　declare　that　there　is　a　correspondence　between　the　price　and　the　historically　reckoned　cost；　i。e。；　the　cost　elements；　labor　and　abstinence。　It　was　only　in　this　way　that　we　could　eliminate　all　those　intermediate　members；　raw　material；　wear　and　tear　of　tools；　etc。；　which　in　practice　appear　as　part　of　the　cost；　and　in　common　with　most　of　our　opponents；　speak　of　labor　and　abstinence　as　the　determining　factors　of　cost。　　　　　　We　must　not；　however；　forget　that　there　is　a　second　sense；　in　which　the　law　of　cost　is　susceptible　of　empirical　demonstration；　namely；　the　sense　in　which　the　law　of　cost　assert　a　correspondence　between　the　price　and　the　synchronously　reckoned　money　cost　of　the　entrepreneur。（43*）　When　we　carefully　consider　the　historical　and　synchronous　method　of　reckoning　cost　in　their　relations　to　each　other；　it　is　manifest；　that　while　there　is　some　connection　between　them；　yet　they　are　not　entirely　the　same；　either　in　their　content　or　in　the　extent　of　their　sway。　The　correspondence　of　the　price　with　the　historically　reckoned　cost　involve　the　satisfying　of　much　more　severe　and　unusual　conditions。　The　leveling　feature；　upon　which　both　rules　rest；　must　here　operate　unhindered　through　the　whole　of　the　complex　system　of　production；　down　to　the　last　elementary　root。　On　the　other　hand；　the　gravitation　of　the　price；　toward　the　synchronously　reckoned　money　cost　of　any　particular　stage　of　production；　merely　assume　that　the　leveling　influence　has　free　sway　in　this　part　of　the　productive　process。　The　gravitation　toward　the　synchronously　reckoned　cost　is　to　a　certain　degree　more　readily　satisfied。　For　this　reason　it　is　more　frequently　operative；　and　hence　there　is　a　wide　district；　subject　to　its　sway；　which　is　not　subject　to　the　sway　of　the　historically　reckoned　cost。　　　　　　There　are　numerous　instances　in　which　the　synchronously　reckoned　cost　of　a　single　stage　of　production　is　effective　in　determining　the　price　of　the　product；　although　there　may　be　no　correspondence　between　the　price　and　the　historically　reckoned　cost。　This　may　be　due　to　the　fact　that　the　leveling　influence　may　be　temporarily　inoperative　through　all　stage　of　production；　or　though　free　for　part　of　the　distance；　it　may　at　some　point　be　permanently　hindered　by　some　kind　of　a　monopoly。　　　　　　Let　us　illustrate　this　by　an　example。　The　production　of　one　hundred　weight　of　copper　costs　at　a　given　time　ten　days　of　historically　reckoned　labor　at　eighty　cents　a　day　or　eight　dollars。　This；　of　course；　enters　into　the　cost　of　all　copper　goods；　and　therefore　into　the　price　of　copper　wire；　copper　kettle；　copper　pans；　etc。　Now；　because　of　a　strong　demand　for　electric　wire　the　hundred　weight　of　copper　advances　in　price　from　eight　to　twelve　dollars；　nothing　is　more　certain　than　that　the　coppersmith；　the　money　cost　of　his　material　having　risen；　will　advance　the　price　of　copper　wire；　etc。　A　copper　kettle　which　weighs　one　hundred　pounds　and　the　production　of　which　involved　an　expense　of　six　dollars；　had　in　the　past　a　total　cost　of　fourteen　dollars；　it　now　has　an　additional　cost　of　four　dollars　and　so　must　bring　at　least　eighteen　dollars；　and　this　quite　independently　of　the　question；　whether　or　not　the　historically　reckoned　cost　of　production　has　changed；　whether　ten　or　any　other　number　of　days　of　labor　have　been　expended　in　its　production；　or　whether　we　pay　eighty　cents　or　any　other　amount　for　a　day's　labor。　　　　　　The　fate　of　the　〃historically〃　reckoned　cost　will　likewise　depend　upon　a　variety　of　considerations；　difficulty　may　be　encountered　in　producing　the　additional　amount　of　copper　which　is　necessary　to　supply　the　increased　demand。　It　may　be　necessary　to　employ　more　miners；　in　which　case　it　is　quite　probable　that　the　wages　of　the　miners　will　advance。　Or；　perhaps；　though　we　can　obtain　a　sufficient　force　of　miners　at　eighty　cents；　it　may　be　necessary　to　work　poorer　veins；　in　which　a　hundred　weight　of　copper　will　cost　not　ten　but　twelve　days'　labor。　In　both　case　the　advance　which　first　appeared　in　the　money　cost　of　a　later　stage　of　production；　will　be　gradually　transmitted；　in　a　greater　or　less　degree；　to　the　elementary　labor　cost　of　the　earlier　stages　of　production。　Finally；　it　is　possible　that　we　may　be　able　to　supply　this　increased　demand　for　copper　without　any　additional　cost；　or　at　the　old　rate　of　ten　days　of　eighty　cent　labor　to　every　hundred　pounds　of　copper。　In　this　case　the　increased　demand　for　copper　will　eventually　be　satisfied　at　this　rate　of　cost。　The　price　of　the　copper；　as　well　as　that　of　the　copper　goods；　will　then　have　a　correponding　return　motion　until　it　reaches　the　original　price　of　eight　dollars。　　　　　　But　in　either　event；　it　still　remains　true　that　the　price　of　copper　goods　may　be　determined；　at　least　temporarily；　by　other　conditions　than　their　historically　reckoned　cost。　In　practice　numberless　instances　of　this　kind　arise。　Even　though　in　the　long　run　the　elementary　〃historical〃　cost　plays　an　important　part；　yet　time　is　necessary　for　its　influence　to　be　felt　through　the　whole　of　our　complicated　system　of　production。　During　this　time　the　stage　not　yet　effected　by　this　leveling　influence　will　follow　the　lead　of　their　special　〃synchronous〃　cost。　　　　　　Let　us　now　take　a　few　examples；　in　which　this　leveling　influence　is　free　to　operate　over　a　limited　area　of