ABSTRACT
The main object of the monetary reform movement is to enable mankind to enjoy the maximum benefit from technical progress. This end is of paramount importance for the welfare of the great masses. It therefore justifies any means by which it can be achieved. If the author is opposed to some of the extreme reform proposals it is not because he is reluctant to break with traditions or time-honoured principles. He believes that all the self-imposed rules and restrictions should be scrapped without hesitation for the sake of the progress of mankind. But in answering the question whether or not it is morally justifiable to sacrifice traditions, law and existing practice, it is always necessary to examine whether any particular proposal is in the long run a step in the direction of progress. In the author’s view, extreme proposals endanger the continuity of progress and entail the risk of a setback in consequence of their failure. It is only on such ground that we are morally justified in rejecting reform proposals. Admittedly, it is a matter of opinion where to draw the line between sound and unsound reform schemes. The discussion between advocates and opponents of reform should confine itself to their divergences of views about the whereabouts of this border line.
