isfaction.

Since wealth always implies an accumulated store of good things, every one
comes to think of the worth of his accumulation as estimated by what it
will do at any time, in any place, in satisfying any need. So, most
naturally, we associate our ideas of value with trade. An exchange of
horses brings in not only the present qualities of each horse for present
service, but all the qualities and circumstances affecting the
possibilities of disposing of the horse whenever something else is needed
more. An expert judge of horses not only knows when the horse is sound in
wind and limb, and what are the signs of docility, speed, etc., but also
what the rest of the world considers the qualities of a satisfactory
horse. In all experience peculiar circumstances, varying the relation
between wants and satisfaction, affect immensely our estimate of value.
When an ancient king shouted, "My kingdom for a horse!" he was doubtless
moved by the uselessness of a kingdom to one about to lose his life in
battle for want of a horse and also by the difficulty at that particular
moment of gaining a horse.

In ordinary experience everybody estimates value by some comparison with
what he can obtain in exchange. A picture of a friend may be priceless in
two senses: first, of so great importance to its owner that nothing can
buy it; second, of so little importance to anybody else that nobody will
give anything for it. In any inventory of wealth the picture could not be
counted; it is valueless. But in any judgment of personal welfare it may
be beyond price. So, in the universal experience, the term value has come
to be used as essentially connected with exchanges and with property as
stored to meet all kinds of wants.

_Value in services._--In a similar way experience has developed the idea of
value with reference to services. A service may be invaluable, as when a
physician saves the life of his patient, but the value of that service is
estimated by the return expected in the community where the physician and
his patient live. Many services of highest usefulness and most important
in welfare cannot be valued in terms of wealth, because no wealth can
secure them. Love and patriotism and philanthropy cannot be had for
wealth. But in comparison of two services rendered for hire, both are
measured by their general utility, either directly or indirectly, and even
this estimate is modified by the readiness with which either service can
be