CHAPTER III

From the End of the First Cycle of American Influences to the Present Day, 1660-1894

Up to the close of the eighteenth century the production of silver shows a remarkable steadiness and uniformity--the decrease on the yield of the Potosi mines being compensated by the increased output of Mexican silver. In the condition of the output of gold, however, there is a perceptible alteration, due to the increasing imports of that metal from Brazil. The change in the relative production of the two metals appears from the table on p. 155.

The effect on the ratio of this increased relative and absolute amount of gold was, however, considerably diminished by the increasing favour with which gold came to be regarded for currency purposes, from the end of the seventeenth century onwards. In general terms this process or tendency in favour of gold continued through the first sixty years of the eighteenth century, at which time the proportion of gold to the production of the two metals had risen as high as 40 per cent., whereas in 1600 it had only formed 17.2 per cent. of the total.

[Sidenote: PRODUCTION OF THE PRECIOUS METALS, 1660-1893]

From 1760, however, such relative preponderance of gold was not maintained. It gradually sank back until, by the beginning of the present century, it had come to form only a little over 23 per cent. of the total. From 1820 to 1840 a recovery took place, but it was not until the Californian gold discoveries that the second great disturbance in the relative production of gold and silver took place; such a disturbance, i.e., as can be fitly compared with that which the sixteenth century witnessed.

+-----------+--------------+---------------+-----------+--------------+ | | Annual | Annual |Percentage | Percentage | | Period. | Production | Production |of Gold to | of Silver to | | | of Gold. | of Silver. | Total. | Total. | +-----------+--------------+---------------+-----------+--------------+ | 1661-1680 | £1,291,750 | £3,134,150 | 29.2 | 70.7 | | 1681-1700 | 1,501,700 | 3,179,650 | 31.1 | 67.9 | | 1701-1720 | 1,788,400 | 3,253,750 | 35.5 | 64.5 | | 1721-1740 | 2,661,650 | 3,988,600 | 40.0 | 60.0 | | 1741-1760 | 3,433,100 | 5,038,200 | 40.5 | 59.5 | | 1761-1780 | 2,888,350 | 6,201,550 | 31.8 | 68.2 | | 1781-1800 | 2,481,700 | 8,131,300 | 23.4 | 76.6 | | 1801-1810 | 2,480,000 | 8,002,650 | 23.7 | 76.3 | | 1811-1820 | 1,596,100 | 4,966,950 | 24.7 | 75.3 | | 1821-1830 | 1,983 150 | 4,075,950 | 32.4 | 67.6 | | 1831-1840 | 2,830,300 | 5,278,600 | 34.5 | 65.5 | | 1841-1850 | 7,638,800 | 6,867,650 | 52.1 | 47.9 | | 1851-1855 | 27,815,400 | 8,019,350 | 77.6 | 22.4 | | 1856-1860 | 28,149,950 | 8,235,950 | 77.4 | 22.6 | | 1861-1865 | 25,816,300 | 9,965,400 | 72.1 | 27.9 | | 1866-1870 | 27,256,950 | 11,984,800 | 69.4 | 30.6 | | 1871-1875 | 24,250,000 | 17,250,000 | 58.5 | 41.5 | | 1876 | 23,150,000 | 18,250,000 | 55.9 | 44.1 | | 1877 | 25,050,000 | 19,350,000 | 56.4 | 43.6 | | 1878 | 25,950,000 | 19,750,000 | 56.8 | 43.2 | | 1879 | 23,350,000 | 19,050,000 | 55.1 | 44.9 | | 1880 | 22,800,000 | 19,100,000 | 54.4 | 45.6 | | 1881 | 22,450,000 | 19,800,000 | 53.1 | 46.9 | | 1882 | 21,450,000 | 20,900,000 | 50.7 | 49.3 | | 1883 | 20,750,000 | 20,800,000 | 49.9 | 50.1 | | 1884 | 21,750,000 | 21,850,000 | 49.9 | 50.1 | | 1885 | 21,750,000 | 21,850,000 | 49.9 | 50.1 | | 1886 | 22,450,000 | 20,300,000 | 52.5 | 47.5 | | 1887 | 22,050,000 | 21,950,000 | 50.1 | 49.9 | | 1888 | 22,950,000 | 23,850,000 | 49.0 | 51.0 | | 1889 | 24,600,000 | 26,750,000 | 47.9 | 52.1 | | 1890 | 24,360,000 | 26,620,000 | 47.8 | 52.2 | | 1891 | 29,000,000 | 36,567,629 | 42.4 | 57.6 | | 1892 | 30,164,536 | 40,668,247 | 42.5 | 57.5 | | 1893 | 32,066,591 | 42,963,027 | 42.7 | 57.3[D] | +-----------+--------------+---------------+-----------+--------------+

[Footnote D: The figures for the last three years are taken from the Report of the Hon. R.E. Preston, director of the United States Mint, 1893 (_Report on the Production of the Precious Metals_, pp. 274-5). See _ibid_. for a most carefully compiled table of the production of the precious metals from 1493 to 1893, differing from the above in material details.]

As far as this _relative_ production is concerned, the period, 1660-1840, is one of gradual and not abnormal variation, neither small nor inconsiderable in effect, but certainly not revolution-working, as had been the case in the sixteenth century with American silver, and as was to be in the nineteenth century with Californian and Australian gold, and in our own days with American silver for the second time.

With regard to the _absolute_ production--gold shows a rise up to 1760, then a steady decline to 1820, followed by a second rise up to 1840. In the case of silver the decline in the absolute amount was steady from 1600 to 1680, then ensued a steady and strong rise to 1800, followed by an abrupt drop in the second decade of the present century, and then by a strong and steady recovery, commencing from 1830 and continuing until the present.

[Sidenote: WIDE EFFECT OF MINT LAWS]

The larger question of the relative distribution of this mass of precious metals depends for its determination upon a full understanding of the law of the various Mints. Speaking in large, during the eighteenth century the Mint ratio was in favour of silver in France, and her currency was almost entirely silver throughout the century; conversely the Mints favoured gold in England and Spain, and gold was almost the only constituent of the currency of either country for the greater part of the century. There can be little doubt that these simple facts had a great influence in actually determining the great currency legislation which closed the century and finally decided England in favour of gold, and France and the United States in favour of a bimetallism strongly favouring silver.

The statement of the ratio is as follows:--

South-West Germany. 1657-80 15.10

Netherlands. 1663 14.43

England. 1663 14.48 1690 15.39 1715 15.21

France. 1679 14.91

COMMERCIAL STATEMENT OF THE RATIO (FROM 1687-1832, FROM THE HAMBURG EXCHANGE RATIO; FROM 1833 ONWARDS, FROM THE LONDON BULLION BROKERS' RATIO).

+----------+---------+ | 1687-8 | 14.94 | | 1689-90 | 15.02 | | 1691 | 14.98 | | 1692 | 14.92 | | 1693 | 14.83 | | 1694 | 14.87 | | 1695 | 15.02 | | 1696 | 15.00 | | 1697 | 15.20 | | 1698 | 15.07 | | 1699 | 14.94 | | 1700 | 14.81 | | 1701 | 15.07 | | 1702 | 15.52 | | 1703 | 15.17 | | 1704 | 15.22 | | 1705 | 15.11 | | 1706 | 15.27 | | 1707 | 15.44 | | 1708 | 15.41 | | 1709 | 15.31 | | 1710 | 15.22 | | 1711 | 15.29 | | 1712 | 15.31 | | 1713 | 15.24 | | 1714 | 15.13 | | 1715 | 15.11 | | 1716 | 15.09 | | 1717 | 15.13 | | 1718 | 15.11 | | 1719 | 15.09 | | 1720 | 15.04 | | 1721 | 15.05 | | 1722 | 15.17 | | 1723 | 15.20 | | 1724-25 | 15.11 | | 1726 | 15.15 | | 1727 | 15.24 | | 1728 | 15.11 | | 1729 | 14.92 | | 1730 | 14.81 | | 1731 | 14.94 | | 1732 | 15.09 | | 1733 | 15.18 | | 1734 | 15.39 | | 1735 | 15.41 | | 1736 | 15.18 | | 1737 | 15.02 | | 1738-9 | 14.91 | | 1740 | 14.94 | | 1741 | 14.92 | | 1742-3 | 14.85 | | 1744 | 14.87 | | 1745 | 14.98 | | 1746 | 15.13 | | 1747 | 15.26 | | 1748 | 15.11 | | 1749 | 14.80 | | 1750 | 14.55 | | 1751 | 14.39 | | 1752-3 | 14.54 | | 1754 | 14.48 | | 1755 | 14.68 | | 1756 | 14.94 | | 1757 | 14.87 | | 1758 | 14.85 | | 1759 | 14.15 | | 1760 | 14.14 | | 1761 | 14.54 | | 1762 | 15.27 | | 1763 | 14.99 | | 1764 | 14.70 | | 1765 | 14.83 | | 1766 | 14.80 | | 1767 | 14.85 | | 1768 | 14.80 | | 1769 | 14.72 | | 1770 | 14.62 | | 1771 | 14.66 | | 1772 | 14.52 | | 1773-4 | 14.62 | | 1775 | 14.72 | | 1776 | 14.55 | | 1777 | 14.54 | | 1778 | 14.68 | | 1779 | 14.80 | | 1780 | 14.72 | | 1781 | 14.78 | | 1782 | 14.42 | | 1783 | 14.48 | | 1784 | 14.70 | | 1785 | 14.92 | | 1786 | 14.96 | | 1787 | 14.92 | | 1788 | 14.65 | | 1789 | 14.75 | | 1790 | 15.04 | | 1791 | 15.05 | | 1792 | 15.17 | | 1793 | 15.00 | | 1794 | 15.37 | | 1795 | 15.55 | | 1796 | 15.65 | | 1797 | 15.41 | | 1798 | 15.59 | | 1799 | 15.74 | | 1800 | 15.68 | | 1801 | 15.46 | | 1802 | 15.26 | | 1803-4 | 15.41 | | 1805 | 15.79 | | 1806 | 15.52 | | 1807 | 15.43 | | 1808 | 16.08 | | 1809 | 15.96 | | 1810 | 15.77 | | 1811 | 15.53 | | 1812 | 16.11 | | 1813 | 16.25 | | 1814 | 15.04 | | 1815 | 15.26 | | 1816 | 15.28 | | 1817 | 15.11 | | 1818 | 15.35 | | 1819 | 15.33 | | 1820 | 15.62 | | 1821 | 15.95 | | 1822 | 15.80 | | 1823 | 15.84 | | 1824 | 15.82 | | 1825 | 15.70 | | 1826 | 15.76 | | 1827 | 15.74 | | 1828-9 | 15.78 | | 1830 | 15.82 | | 1831 | 15.72 | | 1832 | 15.73 | +----------+---------+

[Sidenote: STATEMENT OF THE RATIO, 1660-1893]

+---------+------------+--------++---------+------------+--------+ | | Price of | || | Price of | | | Year. |Silver Pence| Ratio. || Year. |Silver Pence| Ratio. | | | per Oz. | || | per Oz. | | +---------+------------+--------++---------+------------+--------+ | 1833 | 59-3/16 | 15.93 || 1864 | 61-3/8 | 15.37 | | 1834 | 59-15/16 | 15.73 || 1865 | 61-1/16 | 15.44 | | 1835 | 59-11/16 | 15.80 || 1866 | 61-1/8 | 15.43 | | 1836 | 60 | 15.72 || 1867 | 60-9/16 | 15.57 | | 1837 | 59-9/16 | 15.83 || 1868 | 60-1/2 | 15.59 | | 1838 | 59-1/2 | 15.85 || 1869 | 60-7/16 | 15.60 | | 1839-40 | 60-3/8 | 15.62 || 1870 | 60-9/16 | 15.57 | | 1841 | 60-1/16 | 15.70 || 1871 | 60-8/16 | 15.57 | | 1842 | 59-7/16 | 15.87 || 1872 | 60-1/4 | 15.65 | | 1843 | 59-3/16 | 15.93 || 1873 | 59-1/4 | 15.92 | | 1844 | 59-1/2 | 15.85 || 1874 | 58-5/16 | 16.17 | | 1845 | 59-1/4 | 15.92 || 1875 | 56-3/4 | 16.62 | | 1846 | 59-5/16 | 15.90 || 1876 | 53-1/16 | 17.77 | | 1847 | 59-11/16 | 15.80 || 1877 | 54-3/4 | 17.22 | | 1848 | 59-1/2 | 15.85 || 1878 | 52-5/8 | 17.92 | | 1849 | 59-3/4 | 15.78 || 1879 | 51-1/4 | 18.39 | | 1850 | 60-1/16 | 15.70 || 1880 | 52-1/4 | 18.04 | | 1851 | 61 | 15.46 || 1881 | 51-11/16 | 18.24 | | 1852 | 60-1/2 | 15.59 || 1882 | 51-5/8 | 18.25 | | 1853 | 61-1/2 | 15.33 || 1883 | 50-9/16 | 18.65 | | 1854 | 61-1/2 | 15.33 || 1884 | 50-5/8 | 18.63 | | 1855 | 61-5/16 | 15.38 || 1885 | 48-5/8 | 19.39 | | 1856 | 61-5/16 | 15.38 || 1886 | 45-3/8 | 20.73 | | 1857 | 61-3/4 | 15.27 || 1887 | 44-5/8 | 21.13 | | 1858 | 61-5/16 | 15.38 || 1888 | 42-7/8 | 21.99 | | 1859 | 62-1/16 | 15.19 || 1889 | 42-11/16 | 22.09 | | 1860 | 61-11/16 | 15.29 || 1890 | 47-11/16 | 19.17 | | 1861 | 60-13/16 | 15.26 || 1891 | 45-1/16 | 20.92 | | 1862 | 61-7/16 | 15.35 || 1892 | 39-3/4 | 23.74 | | 1863 | 61-3/8 | 15.37 || 1893 | 35-9/16 | 26.49 | +---------+------------+--------++---------+------------+--------+ | | | Up to 1878 this table is derived from Soetbeer, | | _Edelmetall-Produktion_, pp. 130-2. | | From 1878-1890 I have calculated simply in accordance with | | Soetbeer's method. | | | | The figures for 1891-3 are taken from the United States Mint | | Report, 1893, already referred to, p. 251. In the table there | | printed the director of the Mint gives slightly different | | figures for several years from 1872 onwards. | +----------------------------------------------------------------+

As far as the conditions of production of the precious metals are concerned, and the connection between those conditions and the ratio, there is historic and understandable continuity between the period already passed in review and modern times. In the method of expressing that ratio, however, there is a remarkable difference.

[Sidenote: EVOLUTION OF THE MODERN SYSTEM]

With the close of the seventeenth century the advantage of the process of altering the denomination of the coinage, of diminishing the content and reducing the standard of fineness, began to be impugned on theoretic grounds, and in the course of the eighteenth century that process itself fell into disuse. Since that time no Mint or legislative change such as we have hitherto described was made on the expressed value or content of any European coinage. Bearing in mind the twofold importance which was attached to that process of legislative guarding of the currency, this change must be regarded as of vital import. The legislator, from the middle of the fourteenth century, had attempted two things by this mechanism--(1) to follow the general rise of prices, and meet it by reducing the contents of the coins in such proportion as he thought fit; (2) to prevent any disastrous outflow of the precious metals by altering the ratio. The control of the Mint rates of metal-purchase and metal-coinage was, therefore, a matter of importance financially and politically to the nation, and economically to international commerce. In just such measure, therefore, was the entire ceasing of this State control of the mechanism of international exchange and currency a matter of almost incalculable significance in the history of the European monetary system. In the domain of finance it effected a revolution as signal as that produced in the relations of labour to capital by the disuse of the old labour laws. The ceasing of the artificial arbitrary Mint rates made way for a naturally determined or _commercial_ ratio, and the regulation of the international flow of the precious metals was left to the oscillation of trade balances, and to the action of interest rates and discount. The change is one from a mediæval, State-bound, merely legislative system to the modern system, in which the flow of precious metals is determined by the perfectly natural and automatic action of international trade--is indeed the index and safety-valve of it, and of the whole present commercial world-circle.

This was not merely a change of fact and practice, it was a revolution of theory.

For before the old State belief in the necessity of safeguarding the supply of precious metals at any cost and consideration could go by the board, the whole Mercantile Theory must have lost its force in men's minds.

In the domain of theory the transition from the Mercantile to the modern system was gradual, through the various intermediate steps of Physiocratic and Smithian economics, and the complete abandonment of that system for our own can only be put very late, if indeed its period can at all yet be written, for modern Protectionist ideas are only a lusty survival of it. In the domain of financial practice, however, it--the mercantile system--ceased from the moment that the Governments of Europe left their Mint rates stationary, and gave the flow of the precious metals and the declaration of the ratio to the free unhampered natural action of international trade. The steps of the completed process can hardly be detailed, for there was much fear attending it, and the various Governments frequently retraced their steps in uncertainty. The earliest direct enactment was made by England. By the Act of 15 Charles II., chap. 7, sect. 12 (1663), the statutes forbidding the exportation of bullion were removed at one blow of astounding boldness. "Forasmuch," says this Act, "as several considerable and advantageous trades cannot be conveniently driven and carried on without the species of money or bullion, _and that it is found by experience that they are carried in greatest abundance (as to a common market) to such places as give free liberty for exporting the same_, and the better to keep in and increase the current coin of this kingdom, be it enacted that from and after the 1st day of August 1663 it shall and may be lawful to and for any person or persons whatsoever to export out of any port of England and Wales in which there is a customer or collector, or out of the town of Berwick, all sorts of foreign coin or bullion of gold or silver, first making an entry thereof in such customhouse respectively, without paying any duty, custom, poundage, or fee for the same, any law, statute, or usage to the contrary notwithstanding."

[Sidenote: FREE TRADE IN THE PRECIOUS METALS]

Standing so early and so almost completely alone as it does, this Act evinces an unexampled prescience and boldness. It doubtless reflects the commercial traditions of Holland, but that it should have been at a single stroke transferred to England at a time when she was so economically different and distant from Holland, needs make us pause in admiration. The only parallel to it, if any, would arise if France should suddenly, and by a single enactment, adopt to the full the Free Trade policy of England. As a matter of fact this Act of 1663 proved itself for a long time, and through many oscillations, impossible of execution, and far into the eighteenth century the British Government meddled, by legislation and proclamation, with the export of the precious metals, and with the tariff of the coins, as will be seen immediately. It was not till 1780 that a similar Act was passed for Ireland.

In 1803 the Lords of the Treasury were by statute authorised to grant licences for the exportation of silver bullion without any such certificate or document whatsoever as had been required by the statute of 6 and 7 Wm. III. c. 17, sect. 5.

It was almost a century after this action of England that France followed in the same path. By a proclamation of 7th October 1755, permission was given to the free commerce in precious metals and in foreign monies. But in the case of France, as in that of England, the enactment was not immediately nor fully realisable. The exportation of the national specie was still forbidden, and more than once the State found itself obliged to return to the question of the tariffing of its coinage.

It is this vacillation--a vacillation, however, which must in every instance be attributed to sheer State necessity--which makes it impossible to trace in detail and point by point the fall of so much of the Mercantile System as concerned the regulating of international movements of metals. The _practice_ of the commercial world was doubtless in advance of the legislator's standpoint, as indicated by such detached references, and was effectual in completing the revolution silently and under the surface, whether by the aid or in spite of laws and proclamations. The same had been the case, e.g., with the old usury laws.

When effected there are two highly important results which stand as the outcome of this change in the theory of international commerce.

1. The perception of a right theory of international balances opened the way to the separation of finance or currency phenomena pure and simple, and so prepared the ground for a scientific conception and treatment of them. In one direction this treatment resulted in the evolution of a theory and practice of a monometallic system--one, i.e., in which a single metal was made the legal tender, and a second or third metal bound to it in a hard-and-fast, subordinate relationship, so that they could not by their oscillations injuriously affect the tenderable metal. In another direction the same scientific conception and treatment resulted in the evolution (and after a time the practice) of a bimetallic theory. Modern currency history hinges on the antagonism of these two systems.

[Sidenote: FUNCTION OF DISCOUNTS IN MODERN SYSTEM]

This statement of the case will serve to show the enormous difference between nineteenth-century currency situations and problems and those of mediæval and seventeenth-century Europe. To-day the point at issue is between definitely and scientifically conceived rival theories, and the _practical_ difficulty before the world is how to provide, not so much a permanent ratio, as a permanent rate of international settlement between countries using different monetary systems, between silver-using and gold-using countries. In the seventeenth century there was no conception of theory at all, and the practical difficulty was how to frustrate the operations of the bullionist and arbitragist and politicians, and the depletion of national treasure due to their activity, and based on a difference of ratio prevailing in different countries.

2. The second practical outcome of the revolution was the development of the modern system of control of the flow of gold balances, viz. by means of the bank rate and the arbitrage transactions depending thereon, and on interest and discount rates generally.

The modern theory of international trade does not say that between two particular countries, or at any one particular point of time there is an equivalence of exchange, but that between a circle of commercially interconnected countries, and over a certain cycle of time or operations, there is an equivalence of exchange of goods and services. Movements of currency in the most elementary form assist the process, as far as immediate settlements are concerned; bills of exchange assist it when there is need of deferred payments, as, for instance, when a country imports steadily all the year round, but has only one export time, say after harvest; and, finally, bank and discount rates assist the process by providing currency media at times and places which would otherwise be unable to attract a supply. Over the whole circle of completed operations there is equilibrium of exchange, and the machinery by which that equilibrium is accomplished is currency in the widest sense. The index or indicator and safety-valve of the whole is the rate of interest. On these bank rates are based the operations of the modern bullion dealers or arbitragists, which serve to equalise or economise the distribution of the precious metals all over the world.

It will be seen at a glance, therefore, that they fulfil, in an automatic and perfectly natural manner, all that was vainly attempted to be accomplished by the repressive savage action of the State, and the interfering unscientific handling of the Mint and coinage rates. It is in this feature that the great distinction between the modern and the seventeenth-century world consists. Such a difference can only be based upon, and have arisen from, a true theory of international trade. But the process of development which alone made it possible--the development of modern banking, the invention of paper currency media, the breaking down of international trade restrictions, all the mechanical and scientific inventions which have resulted in the binding of the world together in one whole as far as commerce is concerned,--all this would comprise in brief the essential features of the complete commercial development of two centuries or more, and how far they are related as cause or effect it would be hard to say.

In this secondary period, therefore, the separate history of each individual state gradually loses its distinct or isolated importance, as far as mere Mint edicts are concerned. As a consequence the bimetallic action which we have hitherto sought in the history of each individual currency must now increasingly be sought in the wider field of the world currency, that congeries or completed whole of currency of which each national system now forms only a part, and that not an independent part.

France.

In this third period the first change which France made in her silver monies was in 1674, when she for a time coined 4-sol. pieces of a quality below that of the _écus blancs_ by more than a fifth. A great outcry was made by the Mint officers and mercantile community against this money as implying a debasement.

In 1679 there was a noticeable quantity of Spanish _pistoles_ and large _écus d'or_ in circulation, and as a remedy it was ordered that they should be recoined into _louis d'or_ and _louis d'argent,_ the King offering to forego the seignorage as an inducement to bring them to the Mint. In 1686, however, the louis d'or itself was raised from 10 livres to 11 livres 10 sols., and the ratio thus changed to 15-1/2. This being found greatly in excess, in the following year it was lowered to 11 livres 5 sols. (a ratio of 15-1/4). In 1689 both silver and gold were again raised, the _louis d'or_ to 11 livres 12 sols. and the _louis d'argent_ to 3 livres 2 sols., but almost immediately a general recoinage was resolved upon. In this great operation, effected towards the close of 1689, the weight and standard of the previous coinage was exactly retained, but the louis d'or was issued at 12 livres 10 sols. and the louis d'argent at 3 livres 6 sols. Only two years later again the standard had to be altered, and the value of 1693 somewhat raised. It will give some slight idea of the sapping of the coinage that the pieces which in 1691 were minted at 12 livres 10 sols. were, in 1693, called in at a valuation of 11 livres 14 sols. The new species of 1693 were issued at 13 livres and 3 livres 8 sols. respectively.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: THE REFORM OF 1726]

Ten years later a third recoinage was ordered, the louis d'or being issued at 15 livres, and the louis d'argent at 4 livres. By 1709 these species had sunk in equivalence to 12 livres 15 sols. and 3 livres 8 sols. respectively. In that same year, however, their issue value was raised to 20 livres and 5 livres. This extraordinary and arbitrary action was greatly to the detriment of French commerce, and the idea was entertained of gradually reinducing the standard of 14 livres and 3 livres 10 sols. This was ordered by proclamation of 30th September 1713, which was to continue in force till 1715. In the latter year a reformation of the coinage was again undertaken, the reformed species rising to 20 livres and 5 livres, and the worn species remaining at 16 livres and 4 livres. From this latter date up to 1721 the operations of the financier John Law wrought great disasters in the monies. At the time of the erection of the bank, 2nd May 1716, there were four species of _louis d'or_ and three of _louis d'argent_. By 1720 the former had grown to forty in number and the latter to ten. (For the disorders of the period of John Law, see the account of French monetary system, Appendix VI.) It was to remedy this disorder that the great edict of 1726 was enacted. This edict, which formed the basis of the French currency system almost up to the days of the Revolution, prescribed the minting of louis d'or at a tale of 30 to the mark, and issued at a value of 20 livres; and of silver écus at 8-3/10 to the mark and issued at 5 livres--divisional coins in proportion. The legal ratio was therefore 14-5/8. All foreign coins and the ancient species of gold and silver were decried, and ordered to be brought in for reminting. All the prohibitive regulations of an old régime against cutting and export, etc., were re-enacted with severest penalties. But as the rate at which the Mint was ordered to take in the old coinage did not represent the commercial value at the moment, the old coins were not brought in, and up to as late as 1749 the recoinage had not been accomplished, although the Mint prices had been at different times advanced on the whole a matter of 30 per cent. or more. In 1759 the want of currency had become so great that the King sent his plate to the Mint, and numbers of private individuals followed his example, receiving in reimbursement part payment at the rate of 861 livres 5 sols. 10 den. for the mark of fine gold, and of 59 livres 5 sols. 10 den. for the mark of fine silver.

This latter tariff underwent no change until 1771, when, under the pretext of the changes which foreign coinage tariffs had undergone, those terms were fixed respectively at 709 livres and 48 livres 9 sols.

In this résumé the mention of billon money has been generally avoided, as unduly complicating the subject. But in the legislative action of France in the eighteenth century there is one act which necessitates a momentary departure from this standpoint.

In 1738 the Government of the United Provinces diminished the value of their _sols._ by one-half. The French Government fearing that this diminution would lead to an immense influx of such sols. decided to follow suit. By a decree of August 1st of the same year, 1738, it was ordered that the _Douzains_ and pieces of thirty deniers should have course only for eighteen deniers. The important point to notice in connection with this is that, in order to mitigate the effect of this reduction, the same decree limited the tender of such billon money. It was ordered that in payments up to 400 livres not more than 10 livres should be tenderable in billon, and for payments of more than 400 livres not more than 1/40 of the total. The restriction was ineffectual in preventing either the import of foreign billon specie or the operations of billonage or arbitrage, based on the differentiated value of the various kinds of billon circulating. This is quite evident from the preamble of the edict of the following October, 1738, which attempted the calling in of the 30-denier pieces, in order to put a stop to the process.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: THE REFORM OF 1785]

Such a failure is quite in keeping with all previous experience as recorded in these pages, and deserves no special reference. The point to note is rather the gradual evolution and adoption of the idea of limiting the tender of the lower species, so as to contract their action on the main species of the currency. This idea forms the complement of the idea of an agio, involved in the issue of fractional coins on a lower standard or basis than that of the greater specie. The one idea was--in long, over-long, periods i.e.--impracticable without the other; but together, when finally evolved, thoroughly seized and put in practice, they formed the main basis of the truest modern currency system.

To return to the pure gold and silver species. The basis of 1726 remained at law unaltered until 1785. The edict of the 30th October of that year commanded a recoinage; no change was made in the silver coinage, which remained according to the tariff of May 1773, namely, 52 livres 9 sols. 2 den. to the mark fine. By the alteration of the tariff of gold, however, to 828 livres 12 sols. to the mark fine, the ratio of 14-5/8, which had nominally prevailed since 1726, was altered to the memorable 15-1/2. The reason was explicitly stated to be the increase in the value of gold during several preceding years--an increase which had banished or detained gold from the French Mint and even from France.

Writing in 1785, the minister, Calonne, who proposed and executed the recoinage in that year, spoke thus:--

"In 1726 the legal ratio was fixed in France at 14 marks 5 oz. of silver, to a mark of gold, and that which proves with how much sagacity this point was seized is the fact that during a long course of years France retained in her circulating medium a sufficiently large proportion of each metal. Nevertheless, her gold gradually became less common, and for some years this scarcity has rapidly increased, and this precisely because its legal value has always remained the same, while its metallic value has increased from year to year."

He estimated the amount of livres in _louis d'or_ existing in the country at the time of the recoinage, 1785, as 650 million livres, which amounted to only a half of the total coinage (1300 million livres) of the period 1726-85. What seems to have determined Calonne to adopt 15-1/2 was the fact that Spain had the legal ratio of 16, and that there was a probability that, in future, gold would rise in value. As for the market price, he admits that it was only 15.08-15.12 in 1785. The recoinage, therefore, brought a profit of 7,255,216 livres to the King's purse, and a profit of 21,600,000 livres to the holders of the old _louis d'or_.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: CALONNE'S POLICY IN 1785]

His policy was severely criticised in a report made in 1790 to the National Assembly, which proposed a silver standard, with an authorised circulation of gold coins at the ratio of 14-7/9 and the abolition of seigniorage. It is well known that this was nearer to the market rate. Calonne's ratio, therefore, must be regarded as arbitrary and designing. Practically, the latter recommendation of the committee's paper of 1790 had been conceded in the decree of 30th October 1785, as the seigniorage was by it allowed to be no more than the net cost of reminting.

By this celebrated edict of Calonne's, which also enacted a recoinage, the right of seigniorage was practically finally relinquished for France. Fixity was given to silver as the principal money, and a definite ratio was established at which gold was to circulate by its side. In these, its chief points or characteristics, it formed the exact model for the later Act of Republican France, which is ignorantly looked upon as having created the bimetallic system. The Act of 7 Germinal an XI. did but re-enact and perpetuate the edict of 1785.

It is important to reaffirm and emphasise this point, as quite wild and blind estimates have been formed of the later action of Republican France. In merest fact, that later action created no new order, it instituted no new idea, it did not even promulgate its own theory.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: CURRENCY LEGISLATION AT REVOLUTION]

Republican France began her reform of the currency in a very temporary and opportunist manner by issuing a mass of inferior monies of 15 and 30 sous pieces to form the basis of the assignats, and to replace the gold and silver which had almost entirely disappeared from circulation. In the decree of 16 Vendémière an II. (7th October 1793), however, the question of standard was approached, and decided in a remarkable manner. The monetary unit was decreed to consist of the hundredth part of a kilogram, named _grave_, represented (1) by a piece of silver 9/10 fine and weighing 10 grms., (2) by a piece of gold of the same weight and standard, to be current at 15 times the value of the silver piece.

This decree remained a dead letter, and two years later the _franc_ was definitively adopted as the base of the French system. As determined by the two laws of 28 Thermidor an III. (15th August 1795), that system was based upon the silver franc (weighing 5 grms. 9/10 fine). A gold coinage was ordained, of the same fineness, in a piece of 10 grms. weight, but the ratio of value of the gold to the unit franc was not fixed. This was exactly the monetary system which Mirabeau had counselled in his memoirs to the Assembly in 1790. The silver _5-franc_ pieces prescribed under this system found acceptance, the bronze pieces were refused and had to be withdrawn, and as to the gold piece, its issue was not even attempted. Two years later the "Directoire" pronounced in favour of maintaining the 10-grm. piece of gold, but demanded the fixation of its value, proposing a ratio of 16:1. In opposition to this scheme, Prieur submitted to the "Council of the Five Hundred" a project adopting the silver and gold coinage, as already determined as above, but leaving the value of the gold piece to fluctuate according to the market, its value being declared twice annually by public announcement. After being materially altered in the "Council of the Five Hundred," this scheme was definitively rejected by the "Council of Senators," and for several years the question of the monetary system of the Republic was allowed to slumber. When, in the year X., the consideration of the subject was resumed, it was at the instigation of the Consuls. At their desire the Minister of Finance, Gaudin, laid before the Council of State a scheme in which he proposed the issue of 20 and 40-franc gold pieces, of a value based on the ratio enunciated in the edict of 1785, namely, 15-1/2. He was, at the same time, careful to explain that silver remained the basis of the currency, and that the gold money could be reissued if a different market compelled a change in the ratio. In his report to the Consuls, Gaudin admits that the commercial ratio had for a long time been under 15. The decisive point which led him to maintain the ratio established in 1785 was, that to change the _status quo_ by the adoption of 15 as a ratio would occasion great loss to the holder of gold coins, and that there was no sufficient reason for so great a change.

The Financial Committee of the Council of State at first rejected the scheme, preferring that of Prieur, already described, but on an inquest, ordered by the First Consul, who insisted on pressing the matter to a conclusion, M. Gaudin carried his propositions through the Council of State, but with the important difference that the reference to any future change in the ratio of gold to the basis of silver was tacitly dropped. These propositions became the foundation of the law of 7-17 Germinal an XI. (28th March 1803), on which the monetary system of Republican France was finally built.

The _exposé des motifs_ of this law speaks of the gold coins in these words:--

"The gold pieces up to the present in circulation are the pieces of 24 and 48 livres tournois. Article 6 of this law substitutes in their place pieces of 20 and 40 francs. The adoption of the decimal system necessitates this change, which brings all parts of the system into accord. It is on the same consideration that the standard is fixed at 9/10, like that of silver."

Not a word is said as to the ratio, and much more stress is laid upon the suppression of billon money and on the abolition of seigniorage, as of greater importance and benefit to the nation's interests. By this law of Germinal XI. the monetary unit of the French system was declared to be the silver franc, weighing 5 grms. of 9/10 standard. By the side of this franc and its multiples, were to be issued gold pieces of 20 and 40 francs, valued on a basis ratio of 15-1/2 to the silver.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: THE REFORM OF 1803]

It will be seen at a glance from the course of this previous history that this law instituted no new principle, or theory, or system in French currency. The decimal system was adopted in place of the old system of livres tournois, seigniorage was abolished, and fixation of value given to the unit money, and billon money discontinued. But in matter of standard and system there was not even innovation. The system of Republican France, as established by this law, was no more and no less bimetallic than in 1785, or than in 1610, or in the days of Francis I. Theories as such did not occupy the mind of the legislator, and of any conception of a bimetallic theory or system such as we have learned to know there is no trace. The First Consul found at hand the two metals which had formed the currency of his country for centuries. The problem of their regulation was the same which had been faced by his predecessors for centuries, and he settled it in the same practical untheoretic way.

It was only gradually that in its totality of coins the French monetary system was made to conform to the metric system thus established. The old gold coins of 12, 24, and 48 livres were not suppressed until June 1829, the actual extinction of billon money was only accomplished in 1845, and the recoinage of the inferior monies in 1852-56. But such are mere matters of detail and apart from the subject.

The experience of France under this new régime is, therefore, in no wise different _in kind_ from such experience as has been described for the preceding centuries. It is not until the broaching of a bimetallic theory as such, and until the expression of that theory, as a theory, in the formation of the Latin Union, that anything like a special significance attaches to the monetary system and experience of France in the nineteenth century, any more, e.g., than in the seventeenth. The main difference in the situation was not that France had changed her system, and that her experience was henceforth different and of different signification, but that England had changed hers, and that the brunt of the fluctuations of the precious metals about a fixed ratio was left to be borne by a smaller area. The influence and the instance is, therefore, more telling in degree, but in no way different in kind.

The second idea which is commonly entertained with regard to the action of France during this later period, viz. that her action secured for the world at large a fixed and steady ratio, is equally--indeed, still more--fallacious. At no point of time during the present century has the actual market ratio, dependent on the commercial value of silver, corresponded with the French ratio of 15-1/2, and at no point of time has France been free from the disastrous influence of that want of correspondence between the legal and the commercial ratio. The opposite notion, which prevails and finds expression in the ephemeral bimetallic literature of to-day, is simply due to ignorance. From 1815 England has been withdrawn from this action of a bimetallic law, and the modern insular pamphleteer has before his eyes no sign of its workings in his own country. He therefore assumes an universality of such experience, and attributes it to the French legislative ratio. It is in no polemic spirit, but simply in the interest of science that this particular misapplication of history to the squaring of a theory is to be branded. The plainest facts of history are thereby absolutely misrepresented, and the assumption of cause and effect is so far from being true that the repose of the English currency history in the nineteenth century is to be attributed to the _absence_ of a bimetallic system; to its despite rather than its presence and influence. To instance only by France for the moment.

[Sidenote: FRANCE: COURSE OF THE RATIO]

The course of the actual or market ratio has been already stated in the table (_supra_, pp. 157-59). In the graphic representation of this (_opposite_) the legal ratio of 15-1/2 is represented by the fixed line _x.y._, the actual ratio by the fluctuating black line _z_. At no point do these lines coincide. After three years of fluctuations, 1803-06, now above and now below, the ratio sinks persistently below for seven years, 1807-13, touching the lowest point (a ratio of 16.24) in 1813. For the succeeding five or six years, 1813-19, the ratio was as consistently above the legal rate, though with less violence and width of divergence. From the latter year, 1819, up to 1850, its course was undeviatingly below 15-1/2, then from 1851-67--the period, i.e., of the great gold outputs of Australia and America--as undeviatingly above. From the last-named date until the close of the bimetallic system in France, and, indeed, up to our own days, the course of the commercial ratio has been again unbrokenly below the 15-1/2 ratio, and, as is too well known, with an ever-increasing enormity of divergence.

So much for the claim that the French law has dowered the world with a steady ratio.

_Secondly_, what has been the influence of this divergence of the commercial from the legal ratio upon France's store of precious metals? It has been exactly similar in effect and force with that wielded by similar trains of event and circumstance, in the monetary history of France during the four preceding centuries. The exact official figures of the import and export of gold and silver are not obtainable before 1822, and in a continuous stream not before 1830 (separably for the two metals, that is to say).[15]

[Sidenote: FRANCE: BIMETALLIC EXPERIENCE, 1803-75]

From the latter date, however, the testimony of the figures is as explicit as it is forceful. From 1830 to 1850, while the ratio remained continually below the legal 15-1/2, there was a profit on the import of silver, and a persistent and heavy import took place. In 1830 the (balance of the) silver imported amounted to a matter of 6 millions sterling, in 1831 to 7-1/4 millions, in 1834 to 4 millions, in 1837 to over 5-1/2 millions, in 1838 to nearly 5 millions, in 1841 to nearly 5 millions, in 1843 over 4 millions, in 1848 to over 8-1/2 millions, and in 1849 to nearly 10 millions. There was not a single year that was not accompanied by this import, and over the whole twenty-two years the total of importations reached the enormous figure of, approximately, 92 millions sterling. It must be clearly understood that this sum represents not the gross but the net importation or balance of imports over exports, and that the money passed into the currency of the country, taking its place as such and displacing gold _pari passu_. The movement of gold in the same time is represented by the red line in the accompanying diagram. Within the limits of very considerable exceptions, the correspondence of its fluctuations with those of gold is clearly perceptible. The silver, on whose coinage a profit or premium was offered by the existing French law to individuals, could only be bought or paid for by the export of gold or services and goods. During these years, 1830-50, it was quite apparently by the latter method, namely, by remittance of goods, as on the whole period there is a slight gain of gold, nearly 3 millions, contrary to what bimetallic law would have led to expect. The correspondence, however--a simultaneity--of the two movements, of import of silver and export of gold, is strongly marked in the years 1834-39 and 1841-48, and the failure of correspondence of the totals is to be explained by the statistics of French foreign trade balances during the years named.

With the year 1852, the decisive change in the ratio sets in with the new gold influx. The ratio rises above the 15.5 of the French law, and the profit on the importation and coining of silver vanishes. Its place is taken by a corresponding profit on the importation and coinage of gold. The fourteen years during which the ratio remained above the legal 15-1/2 witnessed the importation into France of a total net (or balance) of gold to the amount of 135 millions sterling, and a total net or balance of exportation of silver of 66-2/3 millions sterling. The coincidence of actual fluctuation will best be seen by the graphic representation of it in the table. With 1865 the final and, so far as the nineteenth century is concerned, the fatal change of the commercial ratio sets in. It sinks persistently and increasingly below the legal 15-1/2, in face and spite of the united mintings of the Latin Union, and at once the premium on the importation and coinage of gold changes into one on silver. From 1865 to 1875, one year before the abandonment of the coinage of the 5-franc piece and the consequent relinquishment by France of the bimetallic system, her net imports of silver amounted to 56 millions sterling.

As far as these figures of import and export are concerned, they show only the _final_ results of the action of bimetallic law. The metal on whose importation and minting a premium was obtainable _was_ imported, and in large quantities. That is the single fact standing out in large. The reciprocal fact--of a corresponding export of the metal over whose head the premium offered--does not emerge so distinctly, simply by reason of the complication of the subject of exports of metals with the wider general movement of trade balances. It also is, however, distinctly perceptible and demonstrable. But this is to speak only in large and of final results. What the intermediate course of events--of see-saw and flux, was, can only be adequately grasped from the records of the mintings, conjoined with the records of net import or export of the two metals.

TABLE OF THE NET IMPORTS OR EXPORTS OF GOLD IN FRANCE UNDER THE BIMETALLIC LAW, 1822-75.

+------+------------+------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | | Net | Net || | Net | Net | | Year.| Import | Export || Year.| Import | Export | | | (Francs). | (Francs). || | (Francs). | (Francs). | +------+------------+------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | 1822 | 4,000,000 | ... || 1852 | 17,000,000 | ... | | 1823 | ... | 19,000,000 || 1853 | 289,000,000 | ... | | 1824 | 37,000,000 | ... || 1854 | 416,000,000 | ... | | 1830 | 10,000,000 | ... || 1855 | 218,000,000 | ... | | 1831 | 10,000,000 | ... || 1856 | 375,000,000 | ... | | 1832 | ... | 39,000,000 || 1857 | 446,000,000 | ... | | 1833 | 24,000,000 | ... || 1858 | 488,000,000 | ... | | 1834 | ... | 7,000,000 || 1859 | 539,000,000 | ... | | 1835 | ... | 20,000,000 || 1860 | 311,000,000 | ... | | 1836 | ... | 14,000,000 || 1861 | ... | 24,000,000 | | 1837 | ... | 6,000,000 || 1862 | 165,000,000 | ... | | 1838 | ... | 4,000,000 || 1863 | 12,000,000 | ... | | 1839 | 24,000,000 | ... || 1864 | 125,000,000 | ... | | 1840 | 49,000,000 | ... || 1865 | 150,000,000 | ... | | 1841 | ... | 5,000,000 || 1866 | 465,000,000 | ... | | 1842 | ... | 12,000,000 || 1867 | 409,000,000 | ... | | 1843 | ... | 41,000,000 || 1868 | 212,000,000 | ... | | 1844 | ... | 6,000,000 || 1869 | 275,000,000 | ... | | 1845 | ... | 14,000,000 || 1870 | 119,000,000 | ... | | 1846 | ... | 9,000,000 || 1871 | ... | 214,000,000 | | 1847 | ... | 13,000,000 || 1872 | ... | 53,000,000 | | 1848 | 38,000,000 | ... || 1873 | ... | 108,000,000 | | 1849 | 6,000,000 | ... || 1874 | 431,000,000 | ... | | 1850 | 17,000,000 | ... || 1875 | 454,000,000 | ... | | 1851 | 85,000,000 | ... || | ... | ... | +------+------------+------------++------+-------------+-------------+

TABLE OF THE MOVEMENT OF SILVER DURING THE SAME PERIOD.

+------+-------------+-----------++------+-------------+-------------+ | | Net | Net || | Net | Net | | Year.| Import | Export || Year.| Import | Export | | | (Francs). | (Francs). || | (Francs). | (Francs). | +------+-------------+-----------++------+-------------+-------------+ | 1822 | 125,000,000 | ... || 1852 | ... | 3,000,000 | | 1823 | 114,000,000 | ... || 1853 | ... | 117,000,000 | | 1824 | 124,000,000 | ... || 1854 | ... | 164,000,000 | | 1830 | 151,000,000 | ... || 1855 | ... | 197,000,000 | | 1831 | 181,000,000 | ... || 1856 | ... | 284,000,000 | | 1832 | 60,000,000 | ... || 1857 | ... | 360,000,000 | | 1833 | 75,000,000 | ... || 1858 | ... | 15,000,000 | | 1834 | 101,000,000 | ... || 1859 | ... | 171,000,000 | | 1835 | 74,000,000 | ... || 1860 | ... | 157,000,000 | | 1836 | 27,000,000 | ... || 1861 | ... | 62,000,000 | | 1837 | 144,000,000 | ... || 1862 | ... | 86,000,000 | | 1838 | 120,000,000 | ... || 1863 | ... | 68,000,000 | | 1839 | 75,000,000 | ... || 1864 | ... | 42,000,000 | | 1840 | 96,000,000 | ... || 1865 | 72,000,000 | ... | | 1841 | 117,000,000 | ... || 1866 | 45,000,000 | ... | | 1842 | 92,000,000 | ... || 1867 | 189,000,000 | ... | | 1843 | 103,000,000 | ... || 1868 | 109,000,000 | ... | | 1844 | 82,000,000 | ... || 1869 | 112,000,000 | ... | | 1845 | 90,000,000 | ... || 1870 | 35,000,000 | ... | | 1846 | 47,000,000 | ... || 1871 | 15,000,000 | ... | | 1847 | 53,000,000 | ... || 1872 | 102,000,000 | ... | | 1848 | 214,000,000 | ... || 1873 | 181,000,000 | ... | | 1849 | 244,000,000 | ... || 1874 | 360,000,000 | ... | | 1850 | 73,000,000 | ... || 1875 | 194,000,000 | ... | | 1851 | 78,000,000 | ... || | | | +------+-------------+-----------++------+-------------+-------------+

TABLE OF THE COINAGE OF GOLD IN FRANCE, 1803-75, DURING THE BIMETALLIC RÉGIME.

+------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | | | || | | | | Year.| Gold | Silver || Year.| Gold | Silver | | | (Francs). | (Francs). || | (Francs). | (Francs). | +------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | 1803 | 10,209,840 | 23,171,988 || 1810 | 46,070,600 | 57,170,216 | | 1804 | 38,463,980 | 47,517,195 || 1811 | 132,135,740 | 256,399,040 | | 1805 | 20,474,500 | 46,385,909 || 1812 | 97,717,880 | 160,786,409 | | 1806 | 38,533,760 | 25,241,651 || 1813 | 62,659,680 | 134,900,313 | | 1807 | 18,019,920 | 5,008,903 || 1814 | 64,544,720 | 61,244,121 | | 1808 | 32,311,260 | 67,833,922 || 1815 | 55,379,840 | 37,673,806 | | 1809 | 15,206,440 | 44,296,494 || 1816 | 15,151,280 | 34,917,526 | +------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+

TABLE OF THE COINAGE OF GOLD IN FRANCE, 1803-75, DURING THE BIMETALLIC RÉGIME--_continued_.

+------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | | | || | | | | Year.| Gold | Silver || Year.| Gold | Silver | | | (Francs). | (Francs). || | (Francs). | (Francs). | +------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+ | 1817 | 52,197,080 | 37,143,579 || 1847 | 7,706,020 | 78,285,157 | | 1818 | 95,410,460 | 12,406,076 || 1848 | 39,697,740 | 119,731,095 | | 1819 | 52,410,660 | 21,235,077 || 1849 | 27,109,560 | 206,548,663 | | 1820 | 28,781,080 | 18,436,620 || 1850 | 85,192,390 | 86,458,485 | | 1821 | 404,140 | 67,533,866 || 1851 | 269,709,570 | 59,327,308 | | 1822 | 4,718,100 | 100,679,137 || 1852 | 27,028,270 | 71,918,445 | | 1823 | 408,180 | 82,911,680 || 1853 | 312,964,020 | 20,099,488 | | 1824 | 7,071,700 | 114,476,007 || 1854 | 526,528,200 | 2,123,887 | | 1825 | 45,616,360 | 75,203,291 || 1855 | 447,427,820 | 25,500,305 | | 1826 | 925,540 | 90,835,623 || 1856 | 508,281,995 | 54,422,214 | | 1827 | 3,160,940 | 153,868,978 || 1857 | 572,561,225 | 3,809,611 | | 1828 | 8,025,740 | 161,466,133 || 1858 | 488,689,635 | 8,663,568 | | 1829 | 1,118,180 | 102,642,617 || 1859 | 702,697,790 | 8,401,813 | | 1830 | 23,516,640 | 120,187,089 || 1860 | 428,452,425 | 8,034,198 | | 1831 | 49,641,380 | 205,223,764 || 1861 | 98,216,400 | 2,518,049 | | 1832 | 2,046,260 | 141,353,915 || 1862 | 214,241,990 | 2,519,397 | | 1833 | 16,799,780 | 157,482,863 || 1863 | 210,230,640 | 329,610 | | 1834 | 30,231,200 | 218,288,304 || 1864 | 273,843,765 | 7,296,609 | | 1835 | 4,550,060 | 99,966,149 || 1865 | 161,886,835 | 9,222,394 | | 1836 | 5,097,040 | 43,242,399 || 1866 | 365,082,925 | 44,821,409 | | 1837 | 2,026,740 | 111,858,697 || 1867 | 198,579,510 | 113,758,539 | | 1838 | 4,940,140 | 88,489,324 || 1868 | 340,076,685 | 129,445,268 | | 1839 | 20,670,000 | 73,637,742 || 1869 | 34,186,190 | 68,175,897 | | 1840 | 40,998,240 | 63,795,527 || 1870 | 55,394,800 | 69,051,256 | | 1841 | 12,375,060 | 77,517,941 || 1871 | 50,169,880 | 23,878,499 | | 1842 | 1,852,720 | 68,391,170 || 1872 | -- | 26,838,369 | | 1843 | 2,826,600 | 74,148,998 || 1873 | -- | 156,270,160 | | 1844 | 2,742,260 | 69,134,980 || 1874 | 24,319,700 | 60,609,988 | | 1845 | 119,140 | 89,967,609 || 1875 | 234,912,000 | 75,000,000 | | 1846 | 2,086,420 | 47,886,145 || | | | +------+-------------+-------------++------+-------------+-------------+

During the years 1820-50, when the ratio remained below the legal 15-1/2 and there was a profit on the import of silver, the total silver coinage of the French Mint amounted to £127,458,322, while that of gold reached only £19,333,854. In the succeeding period, 1850-66, when the ratio changed and remained for fifteen or sixteen years in favour of gold, the total gold coinage reached £292,416,951, while the total silver coinage was scarcely more than 1-1/4 millions (£1,315,532).

At the beginning of this second period, 1851, the Bank of France held in its reserves approximately only 3-1/2 millions sterling of gold, whereas its silver amounted to more than 19 millions. At the close of the period indicated, 1866, the bank was holding 23 millions sterling of gold against nearly 5-1/2 millions of silver. In the former case the proportion of silver formed 85 per cent. of the total, in the latter only 19 per cent.

TABLE OF THE RESERVES OF THE BANK OF FRANCE, 1851-76.

+------+--------+--------+-----------++------+--------+--------+-----------+ | | Gold | Silver | Percent || | Gold | Silver | Percent | | Year.|(Million|(Million| of Silver || Year.|(Million|(Million| of Silver | | |Francs).|Francs).| to Total. || |Francs).|Francs).| to Total. | +------+--------+--------+-----------++------+--------+--------+-----------+ | 1851 | 83 | 478 | 85 || 1864 | 273 | 94 | 27 | | 1852 | 69 | 442 | 86 || 1865 | 238 | 208 | 44 | | 1853 | 102 | 214 | 67 || 1866 | 576 | 136 | 19 | | 1854 | 301 | 193 | 39 || 1867 | 697 | 318 | 31 | | 1855 | 72 | 147 | 66 || 1868 | 662 | 474 | 42 | | 1856 | 94 | 104 | 53 || 1869 | 461 | 798 | 63 | | 1857 | 110 | 126 | 52 || 1870 | 429 | 69 | 14 | | 1858 | 294 | 260 | 47 || 1871 | 554 | 80 | 13 | | 1859 | 250 | 329 | 56 || 1872 | 656 | 134 | 17 | | 1860 | 144 | 272 | 65 || 1873 | 611 | 148 | 19 | | 1861 | 225 | 100 | 30 || 1874 | 1013 | 314 | 24 | | 1862 | 187 | 108 | 36 || 1875 | 1168 | 504 | 30 | | 1863 | 119 | 72 | 37 || 1876 | 1349 | 540 | 28-1/2 | +------+--------+--------+-----------++------+--------+--------+-----------+

The statistics of the Latin Union, up to the suspension of the bimetallic system will be separately dealt with.

Speaking only of the experience of France during these years of bimetallic régime, the ebbing and flowing experience which has throughout been instanced as the chief characteristic of such régime is most strongly marked. The legal ratio did not give the market ratio, and so far was it from giving France a stable currency, it was the one thing which unsettled it and made a stable currency impossible. The _exposé des motifs_ of the law of 1876, which will be referred to in another connection below, puts the matter with official brevity. "The variations of the commercial from legal 15-1/2 ratio remained normal during the years 1824-67. All the same they sufficed to modify greatly the composition of the French circulation. After the predominance of silver, which became marked in 1847, the ratio from 1847-67 introduced gold in a large proportion, and measures had to be taken to retain in France the smaller silver coinage. Our silver _monnaie d'appoint_ of .835 fine was created for this purpose."

To regard this question from a theoretic and international point of view, to the exclusion of any regard for the separate national interests of France, is a sheer absurdity. It mattered little or nothing to France that by unloading the stores of silver she happened to possess at the time of the gold discoveries of the Fifties she helped to steady the ratio for the world at large. It did however matter, and very much, that this process of exchange from the one metal to the other was attended with public loss, balanced only by illicit private gain, and with a disturbance of trade in every town of France through the disappearance of the smaller silver specie. Whether or not France or any other country is called upon to sacrifice herself thus--not once but every time the ratio fluctuates from below to above the legal ratio or _vice versa_--for the sake of an ideal, bimetallic, regulating, function, let common sense decide.

The French monetary commission of 1867 speaks thus of the situation--

"It is well known by all that this ratio [of 1803] by the simple reason of its being fixed could not remain correct. There was quickly a premium on gold, and silver remained almost alone in circulation until near 1850. The discovery of the mines of California and Australia suddenly changed this situation by throwing into the European market a very considerable quantity of gold. By the side of this force, which tended to create a divergence from the legal ratio by lowering gold, there was another which occasioned a rise of silver. Under the influence of various circumstances, too long to enumerate, the needs of the extreme East had grown in unusual proportions, and as silver is alone in favour there, it was exported in enormous masses. There was a premium on silver to the extent of 8 per mille, and it disappeared almost completely from circulation, yielding place to gold.

"Preoccupied by the situation the Government charged a commission to study the measures to be taken. Its labours are summed up in the report of M. de Bosredon (1857). After examining the system tending to preserve silver money intact by lowering the value of gold money, and conversely the system tending to the adoption of the gold standard by reducing the silver money to the state of billon, the commission did not decide between them. It confined itself, in fact, to counselling the Government to a transitory step--the raising of the export duties on silver.... The exportation of silver, therefore, continued; and if the disappearance of 5-franc pieces was not remarked, because they were replaced by gold, it was not the same with the scarcity of pieces of a smaller value employed in petty payments.

"Being informed of the obstruction to retail commerce by complaints carried before the Senate, and instructed by the example of Switzerland, which had in 1860 reduced the standard of its divisional money, the Minister of Finance appointed a commission, 1861, to study the remedy to be applied to the evil. This commission counselled the reduction of the standard of pieces of less than 5-francs to .834 fine. It did this in complete knowledge of the cause, fully recognising that in so doing the monetary unity of silver, characteristic of our system, would be thereby broken, at anyrate for its circulating form; for while the franc no longer existed in law, the 5-franc was disappearing in fact, so that the change was equivalent to the establishment of a gold standard."

This advice of the commission was however, by the law of 1864, applied only to pieces of 50 or 20 centimes.

The next step in the process was the formation of the Latin Union in the year following. The above-quoted commission speaks of the intentional aspect of this Union in these words: "This convention places in the front rank gold money, and reduces the pieces of silver of 2 francs and less to the _rôle_ of token money. It therefore definitely determines [_consacre_] the ascendency of the gold francs, and solves practical difficulties arising from the double standard."

This was written in 1867, less than two years after the formation of the Latin Union. It is not the view which prevails among bimetallists to-day as to the purpose and intentional bearing of that Union; but it is the historic truth none the less, and it was only the complete revolution in the conditions of production of the precious metals which made itself felt from 1871, which has given the Latin Union the aspect of a theoretic concert for the maintenance of, rather than as a defence against, a bimetallic system. If silver had not fallen in 1871 the Latin Union would still be the bulwark of defence of bimetallic France against the action of bimetallic law.

[Sidenote: THE LATIN UNION]

The formation of the Latin Union, therefore, was a measure of defence against the action of the bimetallic system in those countries which had adopted the monetary system of France, and lay exposed to all its disastrous fluctuations. The first and moving factor in its formation was Belgium. So far as related to silver, Belgium had adopted the French system by her monetary law of 5th June 1832. By the first article of this law the monetary unit was fixed at the silver franc of 5 grms. weight, and 9 fineness. For years Belgium endeavoured to maintain this law in its integrity. Public opinion, however, demanded the admission of French gold at its normal value, and this was conceded and decreed by the law of 4th June 1861. From that moment she felt all the oscillating movement which France was experiencing. The declaration of Article 1. of the law of 1832 became a dead letter; the gold standard took the place of the silver standard, and equally with France, Italy, and Switzerland, Belgium had to witness the disappearance of her small silver coins. To the previous abundance there succeeded a penury of small change, although the drain was not so immediately felt because of large reserve of silver 5-franc pieces (amounting to 48 millions of francs) held by the National Bank. In slightly over a year, 1st June 1861 to 8th November 1862, this stock of 48,645,000 francs had sunk to 14,629,000 francs, and in alarm the National Bank ceased, on the latter date, all payments in 5-franc pieces. Concurrently with this drain of the 5-franc pieces, the reserve of silver coins of less value began to be seriously affected by the sapping influence. During the two following years, 1861-63, there was little commerce in the precious metals owing to the American war. But in 1863 the movement of drain recommenced. The reserve of 5-franc pieces and the stock of divisional coins of lower denomination fell rapidly, to so low a point indeed as to become quite insufficient for the ordinary trade and small change demanded of the country. After a slight recovery in September 1865, the same downward course continued. The smaller coins, of 1-franc piece, and 50 centimes became so scarce that the bank could not supply the demands of manufacturers for the payment of wages, and the Government had to have resort to the coinage of nickel for small divisional money. The simultaneous experience of Switzerland and Italy is not so capable of statement and exact expression. But it was similar in kind. Previous to 1865 a net balance of over 12 millions sterling (consisting almost if not entirely of silver) had left Italy, and it was known to be the danger of entirely losing her silver which led Italy to the suspension of cash payments on 30th April 1866, and to her acquiescence in the Latin Union. It was not, however, Italy, but Belgium who first raised the note of alarm. Conscious that her monetary community with France made any independent efforts quite futile, the Belgium Government proposed to France a monetary union for all the countries which had adopted the franc as the basis of their currency. Taking up the proposition France invited Italy and Switzerland, together with Belgium, to send delegates to a monetary conference at Paris. At this conference Belgium proposed the adoption of the single gold standard--the silver pieces including the 5-franc pieces to be lowered by an agio, and made divisional money. Italy and Switzerland were of the same opinion, but their scheme failed before the opposition of France, and the final outcome of the conference was the establishment of the convention of 23rd December 1865.

This convention, which instituted the Latin Union, came into force on the 17th of August 1869; and under it one slight change was made in the internal currency system of France. The hitherto full-valued silver coinage from 2 francs downwards was changed into token money (being reduced to .835 fine), the 5-franc piece remaining as full legal tender.

The union was to last for fifteen years. It established an identity in the monetary system of the four powers, as far as weight and standard were concerned, and prescribed free coinage for any individuals bringing metals to the Mints--of gold into any form, and of silver into 5-franc pieces; and reciprocal acceptance of those pieces in any of the States of the union. Finally the minting of each State for national or currency purposes was limited to 6 francs per head.

This limitation, together with the regulation adopted, that the divisional coins should be issued at a rate inferior to that of the monetary standard, must be regarded as a measure of mutual defence against the sapping of the small coinage which had previously been experienced. According to this clause the maximum of mintings for national or currency purposes was presented thus--

Francs. For Belgium 32,000,000 France 239,000,000 Italy 141,000,000 Switzerland 17,000,000

For a time everything bloomed, the minting went merrily on, and private individuals (foreigners) reaped a profit at the expense of France. With the heavy fall in the ratio which made itself marked in 1873, however, events became too strong even for the Union, and Belgium took the initiative by passing a law enabling her Government to suspend or limit the coinage of the 5-franc piece. This principle was subsequently adopted by all the states of the Latin Union. During the years, 1874-76, three annual conferences of the Union were held at Paris, with the result that the limitation of the coinage of the 5-franc piece was fixed thus--

1874. 1875. 1876. Belgium 12,000,000 15,000,000 10,800,000 France 60,000,000 75,000,000 54,000,000 Italy 60,000,000 50,000,000 36,000,000 Switzerland 8,000,000 10,000,000 7,200,000 Greece (which had acceded to the Union in 1868) 12,000,000

Of these states Switzerland alone did not coin up to her total, and at the conference in February 1876 her delegates pressed strongly for the entire cessation of the coinage of the 5-franc piece, and for the adoption of a gold standard. In this she was strongly opposed by Italy. The latter state, on account of the disappearance of her metallic currency before the inconvertible paper, had no interest in the limitation of the mintings of the Union. In the conference of 1874 she even sought and was authorised to coin beyond the quota accorded her, by a sum of not less than £800,000 in 5-franc pieces, on condition that such amount should be deposited as a metallic reserve of the Bank of Italy.

The force of circumstances, however, soon broke down even this policy of limitation. In the course of 1876 the fall of silver became more disastrously pronounced. In addition, it was no secret that the amounts accorded by the conferences of 1874-75-76 for the mintings of each state, had been assigned as maximum, not minimum limits, under the Latin Union.[16]

The next Mint convention of November 1878 would determine the Latin Union on the 31st December 1885, if not prolonged by further treaty. As the time approached the smaller states, such as Belgium, which had committed themselves to a large minting and thereby to the liability of having to liquidate or take back its own mintings--such 5-franc pieces as happened to be beyond its frontiers--at full value, in the face of a greatly fallen silver market, shrank from the responsibility, and sought and obtained a prolongation of the _status quo_ until the end of 1891, and thenceforward by yearly agreement.

Finding that individuals treated the agreed amounts of mintings as a minimum limit, the French Government resolved to suspend the minting of the 5-franc pieces entirely. Accordingly, on the 21st March 1876, M. Léon Say, Minister of Finance, submitted to the Senate a Bill to that effect. It was followed, eight days later, by a proposition of a law suspending the emission of "_bons_" for the coining of silver money 9/10 fine. The _exposé des motifs_ of this Act is most remarkable:--

"The events which have happened for some time past in the relations of the precious metals have brought to a head the monetary question amongst us, although from 1815 Great Britain has laid down principles which have attracted round her an ever-increasing circle of nations.

"The theory of the double standard, on which our monetary law of the year XI. reposes, has been called in question ever since its origin.

"It is, to our conception, less a theory than the result of the primitive inability of the legislators to combine together the two precious metals otherwise than by way of an unlimited concurrence--metals, both of which are destined to enter into the monetary system, but which recent legislators have learned to co-ordinate by leaving the unlimited function to gold alone and reducing silver to the rôle of divisional money. From 1857 the French Government has studied the question, and it may be stated that since that date the principle of the gold standard has won increasing favour through our several administrations."

Then follows an account of the monetary history of France during the period, as in brief résumé already given. "If," the preamble continues, "from 1874, certain precautions had not been taken to arrest the effects of that grave perturbation in the ratio, France and her monetary allies would have seen their monetary circulation invaded by silver and correspondingly drained of gold." Hence the conventions of 1874-75-76, limiting the mintings of the members of the Latin Union, although, "according to us, the fall of silver in 1875 prescribed a complete cessation even for that year rather than a simple limitation."

Germany.

Until the unification of Germany in our own days, and the adoption of the present imperial currency system, German monetary history reproduces perpetually all the elements of that mediæval system, bimetallic in fact though not theoretically so conceived, which England flung away in 1816, and from the toils of which France has not as yet completely emerged.

As safeguards against the evils of that system which she had felt with such bitter experience, and which had culminated in the crisis closing the Thirty Years' War, Germany could only feebly employ the mechanism of ineffectual Mint conventions. For a century she persevered in the effort to establish a common standard and Mint system, but in vain. The attempt had to be abandoned, and the reeling system left to its own process of disintegration; and when at last the events of 1871 came to give her unity in her coinage, as well as political life, there were not less than nine distinct and independent coinage systems in existence.

Hardly had the crisis of the Thirty Years' War passed out of mind before again the currency system had begun to work its baneful effects.

[Sidenote: GERMANY: THE ZINNAISCHE STANDARD]

In 1665 complaints were loudly made of the corrupt and debased state of the coin, due to export and culling. There is, indeed, quite a literature of these same complaints. The language of the _Reichstattisches conclusum_ (Ratisbon, 12th September 1666) expressly attributes this export to the higher value set upon the gold in foreign countries, especially Venice. And the statement of the warden of the Mint of the three corresponding circles--Franconia, Bavaria, and Swabia--delivered in his _Gutachten_ of the preceding May, was that the place of these good German ducats had been taken by very depreciated coins of Italy, France, England, and Holland. The three higher circles, accordingly--Franconia, Bavaria, and Swabia--met in conference and determined on a thorough investigation. The advice submitted to them was to raise the thaler from 90 to 96-kreutzer (see account of German coinage, Appendix V.), implying a lowering of the ratio from 15 to 14-1/8. This proposed scheme was accepted, _in comitia_, in 1667, the fifth article of the resolution specially mentioning the infliction of numerous intruding base foreign divisional money. From this scheme Brandenburg and Saxony held off, maintaining that the ratio had not been sufficiently lowered, considering the condition of the production of gold; and, in the same year, by a Mint treaty between Frederick William of Brandenburg and the Elector of Saxony, the so-called _Zinnaische_ standard was adopted for those two states. According to this standard, the Reichs thaler was raised to 105-kreutzer (1 florin 45 kreutzers) and a ratio of 13-5/9 was established.

The result of this action of Saxony and Brandenburg was to strip the three higher circles of their silver, and in two years (1669) they anxiously met again to consider the question, not only of the foreign base coin everywhere prevalent, but also of the damaging exchange "and ceaseless melting down and exchange of proper coin from the circles."

By a strenuous effort the three circles carried through the Reichstag of 1680 their resolution to reduce the Reichs thaler to 90 kreutzer (ratio 15-1/4). From this decision the Emperor stood apart, with Bavaria and Salzburg, in putting the Reichs thaler at 96 kreutzer.

In view of such contrariety the impossibility of any general régime for the empire became apparent, and further attempts at it were practically abandoned. It was the perception by the mercantile community, as well as by the various Governments, of the consequences of such disorder, that led to the establishment of the so-called Leipzig standard in 1690. This standard was promoted by John George III. of Saxony, and established by treaty between Saxony, Brandenburg, and Brunswick-Luneburg. According to it the Reichs thaler was raised to 120 kreutzers, or 2 florins, the mark being minted into 12 thalers or 18 guldens.

The result of the introduction of this standard was that in a few years the raising of the Reichs thaler to 120 kreutzers prevailed all over the empire. Sweden accepted it in the same year, 1690, and three years later the three upper circles acquiesced. At the same time the gold gulden was advanced to 2 florins 56 kreutzers. The previous ratio of 15 was thereby advanced to 15.1 (15-128/1278).

In 1738 the Reichstag determined on the adoption of the Leipzig standard for the whole empire; no alteration was made in the Reichs thaler, which was still retained at 2 florins and minted at 12 to the mark fine; but a graduated scale of agio was adopted for the divisional coins, which were minted at an equivalence of from 12-3/8 to 13-2/3 thalers to the mark fine. The difference (varying from 3/8 to 1-2/3 thalers) represented the agio.

[Sidenote: GERMANY: THE CONVENTION STANDARD]

From the first, however, the Leipzig standard had no more real success than any of its predecessors. Although theoretically accepted by all North Germany, and adopted in the Reichstag in 1738, it could obtain no actual general adoption through the empire. Even from the moment of the inception of the system in 1690, the process of competitively raising the course of the coinage had still continued, and pieces of 30, 20, 15, and 10-kreutzers were struck on a basis of from 20 to 21-1/3 gulden to the mark. The result was to put upon the _carolus_, which from 1730 onwards was minted in great quantities in South-West Germany, an agio of 10 per cent., a differentiation which was much increased by the disorders of the war of the Austrian succession. Such an agio swiftly drove the larger, full-valued specie out of currency, and during the continuance of that war the currency of Austria and South Germany was almost entirely reduced to depreciated fractional pieces, while the exchangers reaped untold advantage. It was on the close of this war, in 1748, that, with characteristic Austrian selfishness, though also with a boldness none of his predecessors had approached, the Emperor, Francis I., determined on the erection of the 20-gulden standard as a separate Austrian independent system, minting the mark of fine silver into 13-1/2 Reichs thalers, or 20 guldens. This latter system, after the accession to it of Bavaria, obtained the name of the Convention Standard, and the 2-gulden pieces minted under it are styled the Species or Convention Thaler. The convention system remained in force in Austria until the Vienna Coinage Convention of 1857, a period during which the _Convention Thaler_ found wide circulation through South Germany.

The currency was eked out by the Austrian gold ducats and by vast quantities of foreign silver, French _6-livre thalers_ (current for 2 florins 48 kreutzers) and the _crown_ or _Brabant thaler_ (current for 2 florins 42 kreutzers). From 1807 onwards this latter coin was imitated by the South German States, Bavaria especially, in their _crown thaler_, minted on a fresh basis of 24-1/2 guldens to the mark of fine silver.

The selfish initiative of Austria was followed by Prussia and the South German States. The latter, the Rhenish and South German States, adopted in 1761-65 the 24-gulden; subsequently changed into the 24-1/2-gulden standard (see Appendix VI.). The overvaluation of the _Kronthaler_, which led to that latest development from a 24 to a 24-1/2-gulden standard, was the result of the immense circulation of French 6-livre pieces (known in Germany as _Laubthalers_) in South-West Germany. Graumann quite discredits the theory that the overswimming of South Germany by these French pieces, with all the confusion in the currency which resulted, was due to the wars and the progress of French arms, and directly attributes it to the depreciation of the French specie, and to their quite deliberate departure from the standard of French coinage as fixed in 1726.

[Sidenote: SOUTH GERMAN AND PRUSSIAN SYSTEMS]

In Prussia the reform of the coinage system was undertaken by her first King, Frederick I., father of Frederick the Great. In 1750 the latter adopted the 14-thaler or 21-gulden standard, subdividing the thaler into 24 groschens of 12 pfennige each. The measure was undertaken expressly to stop the export of gold which was going on. The adoption of a standard lower than the Convention standard effectually prevented the outflow of Prussian money, and it was not until the beginning of the present century, through the new Mint confusion which arose from the French Revolution, that Prussian money spread into Saxony, Hanover, Hesse, and even into the south-west. The second idea of Frederick's reform was to buy gold cheap, but in this it did not succeed. The intention was to obtain for five Prussian thalers the gold _pistoles_, which were purchasable for five convention thalers. This rate, however, never prevailed in the market, as from the first the _pistole_ was valued at 5-1/4 Prussian thalers. During the Seven Years War, when Frederick was driven to a depreciation of his coinage, his system went to pieces. But an active reform was undertaken upon the conclusion of the peace of Hubertsburg, 1763. The 14-thaler system was re-established, although, as far as the smaller divisional silver coinage was concerned, the depreciation, in which Frederick had been imitated by the pettier states round him, continued into the present century.

In 1821 a minor alteration was made in the Prussian system, by subdividing the thaler into 30 instead of as previously 24 groschen, the former being distinguished from the latter by the title of _silver groschen_. To this Prussian or 14-thaler system Saxony acceded, as did also, in 1848, Mecklenburg and Oldenburg, with many minor differences of detail,--Saxony, for example, dividing the silver groschen into 10 pfennige; Mecklenburg dividing the thaler into 48 schillings of 12 pfennige each; and Oldenburg dividing it into 72 grotens of 5 schwarens each. The gold coin was supplied by the Prussian and Hanoverian 5 and 10-thaler pieces, the Friedrichs _d'or_, a favourite trade coin even in South Germany, and by Spanish _pistoles_ circulating at an equivalence of 4 6-livre thalers.

[Sidenote: CONFERENCE OF MUNICH, 1837]

The confusion of these various German systems was further increased by the uncertainty and difference which had come to prevail in the unit of weight. In Austria alone there were 2 marks in use, the Vienna mark (= 288.644 grs.), and the Cologne mark (= 243.870 grs.). While in North Germany, and subsequently in the south-west, the Prussian mark (= 233.855 grs.) prevailed. It was as the outcome of a desire to remedy at once the evil condition and confusion of the currency, and the uncertainty as to weight standard, which led to the conference of Munich on 25th August 1837. At that conference, Bavaria, Würtemberg, Baden, Hesse, Darmstadt, and the Free State of Frankfort, adopted the 24-1/2-gulden standard as the standard for their several states. At the same time the Prussian mark (233.855 grms. = half the Prussian pound), was established as the Mint mark for the contracting members. For the divisional coinage (6 and 3-kreutzer pieces) a standard of 27 guldens to the mark was adopted, the details of the various fractional pieces being left to the different states. To this convention Hesse, Hamburg, and the two Hohenzollerns acceded in the following years.

This movement of South Germany gave a new impetus to the idea of Mint unification, and led to the General Mint Convention of the States of the Zollverein, agreed upon in full assembly of delegates at Dresden, 30th July 1838, and ratified also at Dresden on the 7th January 1839. The Dresden Convention was practically the first renewed attempt at Mint unification which Germany had seen since 1738. The contracting members to this general Mint convention were Prussia, Bavaria, Saxony, Würtemburg, Baden, Hesse, Saxe-Weimar, Eisenach, Saxe-Meiningen, Saxe-Altenburg, Saxe-Coburg and Gotha, Nassau, Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt, Schwarzburg-Sondershausen, Reuss, Reuss-Schleiz, Reuss-Lobenstein, Ebersdorf, and Frankfurt.

Briefly, the articles of the convention were as follow:----

"1. The Mint mark of all these contracting states of the Customs Union shall be the Prussian Mint mark = 233.855 grms.

"2. On this common weight standard the coinages of the contracting states shall be in accordance with the two systems in existence among the said states, viz. by thalers and groschen, according to the 14-thaler (or Prussian) system; or by gulden and kreutzer, according to the 24-1/2-gulden (or South German) standard. For the purpose of assimilation or equivalating, the thaler to be reckoned = 1-3/4-gulden, and the gulden = 4/7-thaler.

"3. The 14-thaler system to be that of Prussian Saxony, Hesse, Saxony, and Saxe-Altenburg, Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Gotha), Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt (Unterherrschaft), Schwarzburg-Sondershausen, and Reuss; the 24-1/2-gulden system to prevail in Bavaria, Würtemberg, Baden, Hesse, Saxe-Meiningen, Saxe-Coburg and Gotha (Coburg), Nassau, Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt (Oberherrschaft), and the Free State of Frankfurt.

"4. Each state will confine its mintings to such pieces as prevail in the system of which it forms part.

"5. In larger specie, and also in divisional coin, each state to bind itself to exercise the greatest care to preserve the standard and weight.

"7. For the purpose of the commerce of the contracting states _union_ or _convention_ coins (_vereinsmünze_) shall be minted seven to the mark of fine silver, at an equivalence of 2 thalers or 3-1/2 guldens, fully tenderable throughout the Union.

"8. Alloy to be .9 silver, .1 copper; so that 6-3/10 pieces = 1 Mint mark in weight; remedy = .003.

[Sidenote: THE DRESDEN CONVENTION, 1838]

"9. From 1st January 1839 to 1842, at least 2,000,000 of these _vereinsmünze_ to be coined, one-third part each year, and by the various states _pro rata_ of their population. From 1842 onwards, in case of no new treaty, the rate of minting to be two millions _vereinsmünze_ every four years, _pro rata_ as before; each state to give an account of its mintings.

"10. Also of their separate trials of standard and weight.

"11, 13. None of the contracting states to set its particular internal specie at any different value except on a three months' notice, and to renew its currency at face value in case of depreciation.

"12. The states bind themselves not to issue divisional coins in excess of such _pro rata_ requirements as above.

"14. For the divisional coinage the standard of the convention of Munich, 1837 (viz. 27 gulden), is adopted.

"18. The treaty to endure till the end of 1858. States intending to retire then to give two years' notice. From that date, if not discarded, the treaty to be periodically renewed (five-yearly)."

This treaty continued in force nominally until the later and still more famous convention of Vienna in 1857, before which date Hanover, Brunswick, and Oldenburg had also given in their adherence to it.

At the time of the Mint Conference and Convention of Vienna, therefore, there were, broadly speaking, three competing systems in Germany, viz. of Austria, Prussia, and South Germany or Bavaria.

One aspect of this latter conference of 1857, viz. its deliberations with regard to gold coinage, will be referred to separately. As far as relates to its attempted systematisation of these three German currencies the agreement took the following form:--

1. The pound of 500 grammes decimally subdivided, to be used as the basis of the coinage.

2. The competing systems to be assimilated to this basis by the following regulation:--

The thaler (or Prussian) standard of 30 thalers to the pound of silver to take the place of the 14-thaler standard, and to prevail in Prussia, Saxony, Hanover, Hesse, and a string of minor states.

The Austrian standard to be on the basis of 45 guldens out of a pound of fine silver, and to prevail in the Empire of Austria and the principality of Lichtenstein.

The South German standard to be on the basis of 52-1/2-gulden to the pound of silver (instead of the 24-1/2-florin standard formerly used), and to prevail in Bavaria, Würtemburg, Baden, Hesse, Frankfurt, and a few other places of South Germany.

The equivalence of the systems was to be--

One-thaler convention piece (1/30 pound) = 1-1/2 florins in Austrian currency = 1-3/4 florin in South German currency.

All the coins to be of unlimited validity in all the states, divisional coinage to be of a lighter standard than the coinage standard of the country, but lighter only within limits fixed. The tender of these latter to be limited to 20-thaler or 40-gulden.

[Sidenote: THE VIENNA CONFERENCE, 1857]

The regulations adopted by this Vienna Convention as to the gold coinage are very significant, and deserve special note.

The advance in the gold price of silver, due to the Californian and San Franciscan gold finds, acted on the silver-using countries. As soon as the price of bar silver exceeded 60-7/8-pence per standard oz., there resulted a melting down and export of the silver, in the countries which had adopted bimetallism at the 15-1/2-ratio.

It was this experience in France, and the allied group of countries, which led to the formation of the Latin Union in 1865. In mere point of date, that union had been preceded by the Vienna Conference and Convention by a matter of eight years. And as far as the regulations of this latter relating to gold coinage are concerned, there is evidence that the bimetallic action of France had driven Germany to her union of 1857, as a mere matter of self-defence, just as it later drove the Latin states to their union of 1865. In both cases the underlying motive was a wish to protect that part of their currency system which was threatened by bimetallic law. The premium on gold, on its minting, i.e. the profit to be made on minting it at 15-1/2 in France, while its market value was considerably less in Germany and elsewhere, drew the gold to France. It is a mistake to think that France attracted gold simply from California and Australia. She attracted it by the action of bimetallic law from her neighbour Germany, and replaced it by 5-franc silver mintings. The circulation of French 5-franc pieces was so extensive in South Germany, in the period preceding the Vienna Convention, that the cash reserve of the Frankfort bank was at one moment composed almost entirely of them.

The manner in which the Vienna Convention met the difficulty has the appearance of plausibility, though it proved in the end ineffectual. It determined not to establish a fixed ratio but to follow the market price of gold, apparently in the hope of attracting a natural or market supply.

"For the purpose of further facilitating mutual transactions, and for the promotion of trade with neighbouring countries, the contracting powers may coin convention trade coins in gold, under the names _crown_, and _half-crown_.

"1. The crown = 1/50 of a pound of fine silver.

"2. The half-crown = 1/100.

"The contracting powers may not coin any other gold piece, except Austria, which retains the right of coining _ducats_ of the present value, to the end of 1865.

"The silver value of the convention gold coins in ordinary intercourse is entirely fixed by the relation of the supply to the demand. They must not, therefore, be considered as a medium of payment of the same nature as the legal silver currency of the country, and no one is legally bound to receive them as such.

[Sidenote: THE VIENNA CONVENTION, 1857]

"Each state is at liberty to permit convention gold coins to be paid into their offices instead of silver, according to a previously settled fixed rate, and to extend this permission either to all transactions and offices, or only to some. Such previous settlement of the rate is, however, never to last more than six months, and must at the expiration of the last month always be renewed for the following official treasury period of exchange. The rate cannot be fixed at a higher value than that given to such coinage by the average of the official commercial rate of exchange during the previous six months. Each government also reserves to itself the right to alter the rate at any time within the period fixed, and to suspend it when it thinks proper.

"A treasury rate of exchange shall henceforth only be fixed for convention gold coins, and not for other kinds of coined gold.

"The widest circulation to be given to the notices by which the official rate of exchange is fixed. They must be published beforehand, even when a change in rate for the next fixed period is not intended, and must contain--

"1. The statement of the average trade exchange at the principal places of exchange, during the six months immediately preceding.

"2. The treasury rate fixed accordingly.

"3. The duration of the value of the same.

"4. The reservation to alter or recall this rate of exchange if necessary, even before the expiration of the term named.

"5. The declaration that such rate of exchange only affects payments to be made into offices of the state.

"In the countries of the contracting powers pay-offices of the State, as well as public institutions, banks, etc., shall not be allowed in future, in payments to be made by them, to make any proviso with regard to the medium of payment in silver or gold, in such a way that for the latter a certain fixed relative value should be expressed beforehand in silver money."

From the point of view of Austria, this convention had been entered upon with the desire of effecting a gradual adoption of gold coinage, together with a concurrent ceasing of the compulsory note circulation. The outcome of the conference was, however, in quite distinct opposition to this desire, as the agreement which was finally arrived at established the maintenance of a pure silver currency. The continuance of the gold _crown_ of 10-grs. fine gold was recognised only as a trade medium. This experiment of a trade gold coin failed completely, though it is none the less interesting intrinsically, as well as for its reflex bearing on the similar schemes which were proposed in the early years of the French Revolution. The premium on the minting of gold drew it to France, in preference to any other place where a simple market price prevailed. And the 20-franc gold pieces of France overflowed, while the German crowns could not struggle into existence.

[Sidenote: GERMANY: ATTEMPTS AT REFORM, 1860-70]

The attempt which was made by a commercial conference at Hamburg, at the time of the meeting of the Vienna Conference, to secure the introduction by the Hamburg Bank of a gold instead of a silver _valuta_, remained equally ineffectual.

As far as concerns the establishment of a simple and single monetary system for Germany was concerned, this Vienna Convention, the last great convention which Germany saw previous to the reconstruction of her system in 1871, was as futile as that of Dresden in 1838, or as all the conventions of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries previously.

The consciousness of the need of such simplification and unification, however, became thereby only the more apparent. Four years later the first German Handelstag, which met in May 1861 at Heidelberg, turned its first and special attention to the erection of some common currency system. The recommendation which it finally concluded upon was the adoption of the _Drittelthaler_ as the unit mark, with a decimal subdivision. Four years later the third Handelstag, which met at Frankfort (September 1865), confirmed the resolution, with the additional proposition of the minting of a gold piece identical with the 20-franc piece, the value of which should be regulated from time to time; the scheme being, therefore, as before, that of a silver standard, with gold as trade money. The fourth Handelstag met at Berlin in October 1868, and again the matter was most seriously discussed. With the single exception of the Berlin members, all the deputies declared for the adoption of the gold standard. As, in the preceding year, Austria had withdrawn from the German Monetary Union of 1857, she no longer stood in the way of this proposition, and the erection of the North German Union distinctly favoured the project.

In June 1870 the Bundesrath of the North German Union resolved upon a reform and unification of the paper money, as preparatory to a complete currency reform, and in the same month the Chancellor of the North German Union had decided to call a Mint Convention. The outbreak of the Franco-German War immediately afterwards put a short stop to the proposal.

A long train of preparation had thus been laid, and there can be little doubt as to what the ultimate direction of German monetary legislation would have been, even without the war, and the consequent erection of the Empire. That the latter event, however, enormously facilitated the process cannot for a moment be questioned.

[Sidenote: GERMANY: NEW IMPERIAL SYSTEM, 1871]

When the subject was taken up after the Franco-German War, the determination to adopt a gold coinage was only gradually arrived at. In the original plan, as drafted soon after the conclusion of peace, the new gold coinage proposed was intended not to be tenderable, for the meantime, in private commerce. Such a provision roused all the opposition of the mercantile community, and in consequence of the agitation the scheme, as finally submitted to the Reichstag, was for a gold monometallic system. The law passed on the 4th December 1871, and the great operation of recoinage and conversion was immediately entered upon. It was greatly favoured by the ratio existing at the moment, and by the metallic condition of the world. The ratio taken as the basis of the computation was the French 15.5, accepted because of its long and present wide employment.

The previous silver standard thalers were taken as equivalent to 3 marks.

30 thaler = 90 mark = 1 pound fine silver. 90 × 15.5 = 1395 marks.

The gold piece of 10 marks was therefore coined at a tale of 139-1/2 to the pound of fine gold.

Propositions were made to the Reichstag that the 20-franc piece should be made equivalent to the English sovereign, or to the 25-franc piece, giving respectively a ratio of 15.17 or 15.31, but at the moment the price of silver in the London market ruled between 60-7/8 and 60-3/4 pence per ounce, i.e. at a mercantile ratio of 15.49-15.52. It was this fact which decided the adoption of the French ratio.

The chief Acts which have accomplished the reform are of dates 5th December 1871 and 9th July 1873, the first declaring the monetary system and the latter the law of tender.

The unit of the system is the mark, which is the 1/1255.5 part of a pound of gold of 500 grammes at 9/10 fine, and is coined into pieces of 20 and 10 marks. The gold crown is a 10-mark piece, is 9/10 fine, and struck at a tale of 139-1/2 pieces to the German pound; charge for coinage, 3 marks per pound of fine gold.

The pound of fine silver is struck into 100 marks, 9/10 fine. The total amount of silver coin not to exceed 10 marks per head of population. No individual need accept more than 20 marks of imperial silver coin in payments. They are accepted in any amount by the Empire and by the Federal States.

All other German coins are no longer legal tender, and have been withdrawn, with the single exception of the thaler pieces. Whatever pieces of this kind still exist are legal tender to any amount, like the imperial gold coins, each being equal to 3 marks. An Act of 20th April 1870 provides that _Vereinsthalers_ coined in Austria before 1867 should also be full legal tender. An Act of 6th January 1876 has authorised the Bundesrath to put the thaler pieces and the Austrian _Vereinsthalers_ on the same footing as imperial silver coins, i.e. to make them legal tender only up to 20 marks, the thaler being still reckoned at 3 marks. Since the suspension of silver sales and of the withdrawal of the silver thalers (May 1879) there is no likelihood that the Bundesrath will make use of this authority conferred upon it.

In briefest résumé, the course of the silver coinage during the preceding century may be presented thus:--

GERMANY--COURSE OF THE 1-THALER PIECES.

Thalers. Total minted during 1750-1816 64,380,936 Withdrawn by the Government of the States 27,788,956 " under the new Imperial System, 1871-3 5,652,999 " " 1874 6,319,170 " " 1875 2,900,202 " " 1876 2,582,123 " " 1877 1,465,424 " " 1878 864,253 ---------- 47,573,127 ----------- Leaving a balance not accounted for of 16,807,809 ===========

Thalers. Total minted during 1817-22 24,261,735 Withdrawn under the new Imperial System, 1871-3 3,623,511 " " 1874 5,147,970 " " 1875 2,580,580 " " 1876 2,373,496 " " 1877 1,421,719 " " 1878 766,908 ---------- 15,914,184 ----------- Leaving a balance not accounted for of 8,347,551 ===========

Thalers. Total minted during 1823-1856 91,031,741 Withdrawn under the new Imperial System, 1874 40,000 " " 1875 566,677 " " 1876 11,250,277 " " 1877 5,753,269 " " 1878 4,640,068 ---------- 22,250,291 ----------- Leaving a balance not accounted for of 68,781,450 ===========

Thalers. Total minted during 1857-71 215,863,120 Withdrawn by the Government of the States 2,538 " under the new Imperial System, 1875 3,000 " " 1876 25,958 " " 1877 64,806,347 " " 1878 18,915,167 ---------- 109,635,938 ----------- Leaving a balance not accounted for of 106,177,182 ===========

Thalers. On the whole period, 1750-1871, the total minted 1-thaler pieces amounted to 395,537,532 Total withdrawn 195,423,540 ----------- Leaving a balance not accounted for of 200,113,992 ===========

Allowing 83,062,882 thalers as a rough equivalent for the loss by attrition, there is still a deficit of 117,051,000 thalers, or about £17,557,650 sterling to be accounted for (and laid to the account of remintings and loss by arbitrage).

ACCOUNT OF THE MINTING OF THE RECONSTRUCTED GERMAN EMPIRE--GOLD--FROM 1872 TO DEC. 1878

+--------------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+ | | Supplied for the | Supplied for Private | | | Empire. | Accounts. | | Origin of the Bullion supplied +--------------------+----------------------+ | to the Mint. | Pounds Weight Fine | Pounds Weight Fine | | | Gold. | Gold. | +--------------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+ | German gold coin of the old | | | | type | 64,092.3 | 11.4 | | Bars | 402,382.6 | 214,825.7 | | Austrian gold coins | 381.7 | 711.9 | | Francs and Napoleons | 391,166.5 | 809.7 | | Sovereigns | 30,181.3 | 223.1 | | Russian gold coins | 28,252.3 | 20,862.1 | | Isabellas | 12,822.9 | ... | | Dollars and Eagles | 16,860.1 | 20,548.8 | | Turkish gold coins | 51.0 | 1,084.0 | | +--------------------+----------------------+ | | 946,191.2 | | +--------------------------------+--------------------+----------------------+

Making a complete total, with odd amounts from various sources, and including imperial gold coins minted in 1877-78 but now no longer current, of 1,205,786 lbs. weight = £84,103,584.

SALES OF SILVER BY THE GERMAN GOVERNMENT FROM 1873 TO THE SUSPENSION OF THE SALES IN MAY 1879

+-------+----------------+----------------+---------------+ | | Pounds of Fine | Product. | Price Per oz. | | Date. | Silver. +----------------+---------------+ | | | Marks. | Pence. | +-------+----------------+----------------+---------------+ | 1873 | 105,923.372 | 9,296,682.77 | 59-5/16 | | 1874 | 703,685.175 | 61,135,670.29 | 58-3/4 | | 1875 | 214,898.594 | 18,208,449.08 | 57-1/4 | | 1876 | 1,211,759.204 | 93,936,482.37 | 52-3/8 | | 1877 | 2,868,095.533 | 230,424,238.51 | 54-5/16 | | 1878 | 1,622,696.403 | 126,203,852.08 | 52-9/10 | | 1879 | 377,744.712 | 27,934,417.89 | 50 | +-------+----------------+----------------+---------------+ | | 7,104,895.993 | 567,139,992.99 | | +-------+----------------+----------------+---------------+

The total silver withdrawn from circulation up to the close of 1880 was 1,080,486,138 marks.

Of this amount 382,684,841 marks were delivered to the Mint for coinage into the new imperial silver coins.

The remaining 696,797,069 marks were melted into silver and produced 7,474,644 pounds of fine silver. Of this quantity 7,102,862 were sold up to May 1879. The balance of unsold silver still in the hands of the Imperial Government is 339,353 pounds of fine silver.

England.

Charles II. began his regulation of the currency by the proclamation of 29th January 1661, fixing the coins to be current and their tariff. This proclamation was followed by another, of 10th June 1661, against the export of gold or silver, and against buying or selling the metals at higher rates than were given at the Mint, a practice to which the proclamation attributed the scarcity of money. This edict proved of no avail, for, in spite of it, the gold coins were exported in such quantities that they were current more abundantly in foreign parts than in England. As the result of deliberation of the Privy Council, assisted by the Commissioners of Trade and officers of the Mint, who all attributed the export to the higher price of gold abroad, it was determined to raise the price of the gold coins to or near the value which they had on the Continent at the moment. Accordingly, by proclamation of the 26th August 1661, the value of the gold _unite_ was raised from 22s. to 23s. 6d., and other gold coins in proportion, the silver currency being left unaltered.

In referring to the Act for the free trade in gold and silver (_supra_, p. 162), mention has already been made of the motive of the legislator, namely, to increase the importation of the metals to the Mint. Exactly similar was the intention, as expressed in the preamble of the succeeding Act of 1666 (8 Charles II. c. 5), which abolished the right of seigniorage, thereby establishing free and gratuitous coinage in England--the principle of minting still in force in this country.[17]

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: CHARLES II]

The testimony of both Act and declaration as to the scarcity of money is confirmed by actual record. In the following year, 1667, there was a great scarcity of money, and _dollars_ and _pieces of eight_ were bought up by the goldsmiths and bankers for 4s. 3d. each, and instead of being brought to the Mint were at once exported to France for 4s. 10d. and to Ireland and Scotland for 5s.

According to the new indenture for the coinage of 1670, a slight reduction in the standard of the gold took place, the pound of crown gold (22 carats fine) being to be minted at a tale of £44, 10s. The scarcity of money still continued, however, and the separate experience of Ireland only corroborated that of England. The general statement of the case as to the fate of the coined money since the Act of 18 Car II., which instituted free coinage, is thus put by Sir Dudley North, in his _Discourses upon Trade_: "I call to witness the vast sums that have been coined in England since the free coinage was set up. What is become of it all? Nobody believes it to be in the nation, and it cannot well be all transported, the penalties for so doing being so great. The case is plain--the melting-pot devours it all; and I know no intelligent man who doubts but the new money goes this way. Silver and gold, like other commodities, have their ebbings and flowings; upon the arrival of quantities from Spain, the Mint commonly gives the best price, i.e. coined silver for uncoined silver, weight for weight. Wherefore it is carried into the Tower and coined. Not long after there will come a demand for bullion to be exported again. If there is none, but all happens to be in coin, what then? Melt it down again; there's no loss in it, for the coining costs the coiners nothing. Thus the nation hath been abused and made to pay for the twisting of straw for asses to eat."

By the time of the accession of William III. the scarcity of silver had become so great as to cause a petition from divers working goldsmiths in and about the City of London to the House of Commons (9th April 1690). It stated "that upon search at the Customs they found that since last October entries had been made of 286,102 oz. of silver in bullion, and 89,949 _dollars_ and _pieces of eight_ for exportation by divers private persons, and they doubted not but it would appear that not only the East India Company, but also divers Jews and merchants, had of late bought up great quantities of silver to carry out of the kingdom, and had given 1-1/2d. per oz. above the value, which had encouraged the melting down of much plate and milled monies; whereby for six months past, not only the petitioners in their trade, but the Mint itself had been stopped from coining."

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: THE EXPORT IN 1690]

The petition was referred to a committee of the Lower House, which reported on the 8th May that great quantities of silver had been exported, of which seven-eighths had been shipped off by the Jews, who would do anything for their profit. The reason for the exportation, too, was plain, for the French king, of late finding his money very scarce, had raised his coin 10 per cent., which was an encouragement to send silver to fill his coffers, and therefore the Jews exported it daily in very great quantities. The melting down of £1000 of milled money for exportation was attended with a profit of £25 ready money and upwards, silver being coined at the Mint at 5s. 2d. per oz., but at the time of exportation sold generally at 5s. 3-1/2d. The remedies proposed to the committee were either a prohibition of export or the enhancing of the English monies.

Not less than three measures were presented to the House for the prohibition of export--one of them by Sir Richard Temple--but were all lost; and, meanwhile, the exports to Holland and France continued. In November 1690 it was calculated that during the preceding sixteen months about 140,000 oz. had been exported.

In addition to this actual drain of coinage, the processes of culling, clipping, and counterfeiting, which had been going on through the reigns of Charles II. and James II., had resulted in an unexampled depreciation of so much of the coinage as remained. A large portion of the currency consisted of iron, brass, or copper-pieces plated, and such coins as were of good silver were worth scarcely one-half their current value.

This statement is more than borne out by quite reliable computations which were made in the process of the recoinage five years later. A medium lot of 5-1/2 bags, containing in tale £57,200 of the called-in currency, and which should have weighed 221,418 oz. 16 dwt. 8 grs., was found to weigh only 113,771 oz. 5 dwt. According to the accounts of Neale, then master and warden of the Mint, 4,695,303 dwt. 15 oz. 2 grs. of the clipped silver money produced only 790,860 lbs. 1 oz. 19 grs., implying a depreciation in weight alone of over 47.75 per cent.

The process of stripping the country of currency was increased by the continual pouring out of money in aid of William's wars, and the loss in exchange on such large remittances made the evil only too apparent. The one or two millions yearly remitted to the Continent for the British armies were negotiated in Holland in a thousand ways to England's prejudice. Partisan statements were made that whereas in the beginning of the war the Dutch allowed 43 schillings for an English pound they gradually lowered the exchange to 28 schillings. Guineas, which were equal in value to 21s. 6d. in silver, rose to 30s.; and they would have risen to a still higher rate if the officers of the exchequer and the receivers of public revenue had not refused to receive them in payment at the increased value.

In 1695 the matter was taken up in the House of Commons, and a committee appointed. The report of this committee, which was never passed, was based on the proposition of a reduction of standard. By Montague's influence the proposals were dropped, and it was not till the 22nd November that the Act for remedying the ill state of the coins passed. It is well known that the unwise determination of the Government of William III. to adhere to the pre-existing standard was due to the action and contrivance of Montague as Chancellor of the Exchequer, and to the influence of Locke's writings. By a subsequent series of Acts, based on the complaints of merchants representing the evils resulting from the unsettled price of gold, the price of the guinea was ordered to be gradually reduced from 30s. to 28s., 26s., and finally 22s., before 10th April 1696.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: RECOINAGE OF 1696]

This great recoinage scheme was only completely accomplished in 1699, having occupied the greater part of four years, and after a long series of Acts and proclamations of, occasionally, very doubtful wisdom.

According to the accounts of the officers of the Mint, the new silver coin amounted in tale to £6,882,908, 19s. 7d. The worn and clipped money called in was estimated roughly at £4,000,000, on which the loss was about £2,000,000; the whole charge and loss being stated at not less than £2,700,000. It is significantly affirmed that, in a manner, all the called-in silver was found to consist only of pieces coined between the days of Edward VI. and 1662, a sure indication of the fate which had befallen the coinage issued since the Restoration.

Before the transaction was finally complete the last safeguard and complement of the system had been adopted, in fixing the relation of the gold coinage to the new silver issue. On the 22nd September 1698, a report was given in to the House of Commons, signed by four names, including that of John Locke, stating that the value of gold in Holland and the neighbouring countries was, as near as could be computed upon a medium, 15:1 in silver; and that, according to this value, the currency of the guinea at 22s. was too high, and occasioned a disproportionate importation of gold and an exportation of silver. The bringing down of the guinea to 21s. 6d. would make the value of English gold and coin very near 15-1/2:1 to silver, which, though not so low as the rate in Holland, would in their opinion be sufficient to correct the error.

In consequence of this report the Commons resolved that, under the Act 7 and 8 William III. chap. 19, no person was obliged to take guineas at 22s. a piece. The price then fell to 21s. 6d., at which rate they were received by the officers of the revenue. With the exception of this merely declaratory tariffing of the guinea, it is to be borne in mind that this recoinage of William's reign was carried out on the principle enunciated by Montague, and backed by the authority of Locke, namely, that of a retention of the old standard, although in the face of a clearly established advance in the value of silver, and in face of quite irrefutable answers to all Locke's arguments. Momentarily the scheme succeeded; the adverse exchange was instantly redressed, while the renewal of the coinage and the ratio of 1698 was sufficiently above the continual ratio to turn the flow of gold, as doubtless was the (unexpressed) design in adopting it. According to Burnet the packet-boat from France seldom came over during the following winter without bringing 10,000 _louis d'or_, and often more. "The nation was indeed filled with them, and in six months a million of guineas was coined out of them. The merchants in fact said that the balance of trade was then so much turned to our side that whereas we were wont to carry over a million of our money in specie, we then sent no money to France, and had at least half that sum sent over to balance the trade."

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: EFFECTS OF THE RATIO OF 1698]

The circulation of French and other foreign gold became so great that on the 5th February 1701 the Council issued a proclamation that the _louis d'or_ and Spanish _pistole_ should not pass for above 17s. Such action at once brought those coins to the Mint, and nearly 1-1/2 millions were coined out of them.

It was not seen at the moment that the establishment of this ratio so favourable to gold was _pari passu_ unfavourable to silver. The idea was entertained that the French gold came over to bribe English members, i.e., on mere political causes. The hypothesis was needless as it was incorrect. Gold came over because it was higher priced in England than abroad through the ratio of 1698, and for the same reason silver left the country to pay for the gold. The one movement was the essential counterpart of the other, and made itself at last only too visible.

As early as the seventh year of Anne's reign--only nine years after the completion of this great recoinage, it was found necessary to give further encouragement to the coinage of silver by offering a premium on every ounce of foreign coins which should be brought to the Mint within a limited time. The premium was not to exceed 2-1/2d. per oz., and the time limited was from the 17th April to the 1st December 1709.

Such a measure has been already noticed in the history of France; it was indeed a design frequently employed there under the title of _Surachat_, and it always proved as futile as the Government of Anne found it to be. As the drain continued, representations were made by the officers of the Mint to the Treasury, and in 1717 the House of Commons requested these representations to be laid before it (December 20th). On the same and following day a remarkable speech was made by a member, Mr. Aislabie, who took notice of the great scarcity of the silver species, and proposed the remedy of lowering the gold species. On the second day he was seconded by Mr. Caswall, who suggested that the overvaluation of gold in the current coins of Great Britain had caused the export of great quantities of silver species, "and to that purpose [i.e. the purpose of his argument] laid open a clandestine trade, which of late years had been carried on by the Dutch, Hamburgers and other foreigners, in concert with the Jews and other traders here, which consisted in exporting silver coins and importing gold in lieu thereof; which being coined into guineas at the Tower, near 15 pence was got by every guinea, which amounted to about 5 per cent.; and as these returns might be made five or six times in a year considerable sums were got by it, to the prejudice of Great Britain, which thereby was drained of silver and overstocked with gold." He concluded by proposing to lower the price of guineas and all other gold specie.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: SIR ISAAC NEWTON'S REPORT, 1717]

His speech was received with applause, and the House unanimously petitioned the King to call the guinea down to 21s., and other gold species in proportion. To this George I. immediately acceded, and the proclamation to that effect _verbatim_ was issued on the following day, 22nd December 1717.

The report for which the House had called two days earlier, and which was produced on the 21st December, was the celebrated report made some months before by Sir Isaac Newton as master of the Mint, at the demand of the Commissioners of the Treasury. It is a document deserving the careful attention of every student of currency history. Newton reviews the ratio in each of the then commercial nations, and shows the effect of difference of ratio in producing export and disturbance of one or other metal. "Gold in Spain and Portugal is of sixteen times more value than silver of equal weight and alloy; at which rate a guinea is worth 21s. 1d. net; this high price keeps their gold at home in good plenty, and carries away the Spanish silver into all Europe. So that at home they make their payments in gold, and will not pay in silver without a premium. Upon the coming in of a plate [silver] fleet the premium ceases or is but small, but as their silver goes away and becomes scarce the premium increases and is most commonly about six per cent."

In France the ratio was 15:1, and the guinea therefore worth 20s. 8-1/2d. In Holland it was worth 20s. 7-1/2d., in Italy, Germany, Poland, Denmark and Sweden, from 20s. 7d. to 20s. 4d. "In China and Japan the pound weight of fine gold is worth but 9 or 10 lbs. weight of fine silver, and in East India it may be worth 12 lbs., and the low price of gold in proportion to silver carries away the silver from all Europe." "If gold were lowered only so as to have the same proportion to the silver money in England, which it hath in the rest of Europe, there would be no temptation to export silver rather than gold to any part of Europe, and to compass this last there seems nothing more requisite than to take off about 10d. or 12d. from the guinea."

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: THE STATE OF COINAGE IN 1760]

In a subsequent report of the 21st September 1717, Newton stated that, since the beginning of 1702 to September 1717, the gold coined at the Mint amounted to £7,127,835, while the silver within the same period only amounted to £223,380, of which £143,086 had been brought to the Mint in response to the premium offered; in 1709 and 1711, of their own free will, the goldsmiths had only brought a matter of £21,220 to the Mint. In the House of Lords, early in the following year, it was proved that during the year 1717 the East India Company had exported nearly 3,000,000 oz. of silver.

The immediate purpose of the above proclamation of 22nd December 1717 was for a time thwarted by a speculative hoarding of silver in expectation of a further calling down of the gold species; and it was to cut the ground from under this speculation that in January 1718 both Houses declared their determination not to alter the standard of gold and silver coins in the kingdom, and proceeded in place of such alteration to prepare a bill for preventing the melting down of the coins of the kingdom.

It is demonstrable, even from Sir Isaac Newton's own figures, that the calling down of the guinea to 21s., though largely, was not completely effective in destroying the profit of arbitrage transactions with Holland. With the guinea at 21s., the ratio was still 15-14295/68200 while in France and Holland the ratio was 15 or under. That the process of culling and exporting the heaviest silver specie still continued is proved by the state of silver coinage twenty years later, when shillings were found to be deficient in weight, by between 6 and 11 per cent., and sixpences between 11 and 22 per cent., and all species so scarce as to threaten greatest confusion in every branch of trade. At the accession of George III., 1760, the silver coinage was found in so imperfect a state that the crown pieces had almost entirely disappeared, though minted since 1795 to the amount of over a million and a half sterling. Of half-crowns, likewise minted to the value of £2,329,370, only defaced and impaired specimens remained current, while shillings and sixpences had lost every sign of impression. Up to 1763 only a matter of £5791 in silver had issued from the Mint--practically no coinage at all.

Gradually however, owing to the force of wider principles at work, the matter of the ratio righted itself. Ever since 1756 the value of gold had been rising all over Europe. In 1759 the continental ratio was still calculated at 14-1/2, as compared with 15-1/5 in England; but by 1773 the continental ratio had overtaken the English, and the market price of standard silver had risen to 5s. 2d. per oz.--the English Mint rate. In the greatly depreciated state of the silver coinage--three-fourths of it was said to be base--even the approach of a fair ratio acted prejudicially on gold. Already, in 1771, the export of gold to Holland had become noticed, and it was asserted that the gold coins had never before been so deficient. They were sent over to Holland, and there filed and returned and put into circulation--a bimetallic phenomenon that always recurs in a currency containing two differently depreciated elements.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: STATE OF THE COINAGE IN 1774]

The idea that bimetallic action replaces one good metal by another, an equal weight of one metal for that of the other, a good undepreciated coinage of silver for a good undepreciated coinage of gold, or _vice versâ_, is not borne out by a single instance in history. Bimetallic action always substitutes the less for the greater, whether weight or value, the more depreciated for the less, or the depreciated for the perfect standard coin. In this particular instance, 1774, the depreciation of silver had been the result of the action of a too high ratio from 1717 onwards; the depreciation of gold was effected in a much less time between 1770 and 1773, simply because the already depreciated state of the silver causing that differentiation of value, which is the bullionist's opportunity, happened to coincide with a natural rise of the value of gold all over the Continent. The result, therefore, of fifty years of bimetallic régime left England with a currency depreciated in both its limbs, in both gold and silver, and as deficient in the quantity current as in the weight of the individual pieces. This is not in keeping with the theory of bimetallism as developed to-day, according to which the transition from one coin to the other would only be made at the point of equation, and the substituted metal would equalise that displaced. This is theory. The facts of the situation in 1774 are not theory but history, and tell a different tale.

"The evil was so great," says Lord Liverpool, "that the Government found it necessary to take this difficult subject into their immediate consideration. On this occasion I addressed a letter to a noble Lord, who was then Chancellor of the Exchequer, suggesting what appeared to me the proper remedy for this evil. I proposed that, with a view to the general reform of the coins of the realm, all the deficient gold coins should in the first place be called in and recoined, and that in future the currency of the gold coin should be regulated by weight as well as by tale, and that the several pieces should not be legal tender if diminished below a certain weight. Your Majesty was pleased to approve of this advice and to propose to your Parliament, on 13th January 1774, the calling in and recoining of all the deficient gold coins; and the Chancellor of your Exchequer opened the whole of this plan to the House of Commons, who approved of the measure, which was carried into immediate execution without any complaint and with great success. The defects which had previously existed in this species of coins were thereby removed, and the regulation, then established, of weighing the gold coin has been the means of preserving it at nearly the state of perfection to which it was then brought."

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: RECOINAGE OF 1774]

The resolutions of the House of Commons on which this recoinage depended were passed on the 10th May 1774. After stating the depreciation existing in the gold coinage the House asserted--(3) that it has been a practice to export and melt down the new and perfect gold coin soon after it is issued for private advantage, to the great detriment of England; (4) that while pieces of gold coin, differing so greatly in weight, are allowed to be current under the same denomination and at the same rate and value, great quantities of the new and perfect pieces will continue to be exported and melted down, and, there is reason to apprehend, will be recoined into pieces the most deficient that are allowed to be current."

The House then goes on to adopt the principle of limiting the depreciation to be allowed on any single coin, i.e. of making the coins current by weight as well as tale within the limits allowed.

The House next turned its attention to the silver element of the currency. At the outset it was met by the patent fact that the depreciated silver coinage had been made the handle or lever, or _point d'avantage_, in all the operations against gold. "Whereas," is the recital of the Act of 14 George III. c. 42, "considerable quantities of old silver coin of this realm, or coin purporting to be such, greatly below the standard of the Mint in weight, have been lately imported into this kingdom, and it is expedient that some provision should be made to prevent the practice," etc. The Act therefore decrees the prohibition of importation of light silver coinage into the kingdom, and its confiscation in case of discovery as such. "And be it further enacted ... that no tender in the payment of money made in the silver coin of the realm, of any sum exceeding the sum of £25 at any one time, shall be reputed in law or allowed to be a legal tender within Great Britain or Ireland for more than according to its value by weight, after the rate of 5s. 2d. per oz. of silver, and no person to whom such tender shall be made shall be any way bound thereby or obliged to receive the same in payment in any manner than as aforesaid; any law, statute, or usage to the contrary notwithstanding."

The importance of this latter epoch-making clause is vital. It is the first enactment of a law of tender in the history of English monetary legislation, and it was the first step towards the shaking off the incubus of that mediæval currency system which was even then only coming to be understood in all its fatal perniciousness. For statesmanship, the only parallel to it is that Act of Henry III. of France, which proved so shortlived in its adoption (see _supra_, pp. 87-88). It was the first step in the evolution of that system of a safeguarded currency which was finally constructed in 1816.

This Act prohibiting the importation of light silver was renewed in 1776 for a further two years, and was again, in 1778, continued until the 1st day of May 1783, and from thence to the end of the next session of Parliament. On the 21st June 1798 the Act, being then expired, was revived and further continued to the 1st day of June 1799 by a new statute, and on the 12th July 1799 the Act was made perpetual by statute of 39 Geo. III. c. 75.

The later legislative action with regard to silver belongs to the final construction of the English currency system. In the main, the recoinage of gold was accomplished in the year 1774, though it lingered over the three succeeding years as appears by the items in the Appropriation Acts.

The accounts of grants for recoinage were as follows:--

1774. The first grant £250,000 0 0 1775. To the bank for receiving the deficient gold coin 46,846 0 0 For extraordinary charges of the Mint 22,824 19 0 1776. Further grant 92,421 14 1-1/4 1778. " " 105,227 8 3 ------------------ £517,320 2 2-1/4 ==================

The scope of this series of Acts of 1774 will be seen at a glance; as well as the tendency in policy, namely, in favour of gold, which it indicated. The gold coinage was renewed, and as a safeguard against its future depreciation the existing depreciated coin was cut off from any sapping action upon it by the above restriction as to tender by weight. For the renewal of the silver coinage itself no actual measures were taken save the prohibition of the import of light coins.

For more than twenty years the defective state of the silver coin continued quite unheeded; evidently as no longer causing international embarrassment, now that its function and differentiating action upon the companion metal had been partially tied down and limited.

In 1787 the depreciation of the silver coinage was ascertained experimentally, when it was found that half-crowns were defective by over 9 per cent., shillings by over 24 per cent., and sixpences by more than 38 per cent. of their proper weight. To this depreciation was added an exterior cause of drain by the action of France, who in 1792 increased the scarcity of silver coins and bullion by the issue of her assignats. In that year not less than 2,909,000 oz. of silver were purchased with assignats and sent into France. Five years later an attempt was made to supply the deficiency of the silver coins by the issue of Spanish _dollars_, countermarked with the hall mark of the King's head. This was after the Bank of England had, in accordance with the minute of the Privy Council of 26th February 1797, suspended cash payments.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: ACT OF 1798]

On the 7th of February of the following year, 1798, the subsisting Committee of Council for Coins was dissolved, and a new committee appointed to consider the state of the coins and Mint. During its deliberations, and until it established the new rule, the further coining of silver was suspended by the Act already spoken of, which (21st June 1798) revived the old law against importation of light silver. This suspension of silver coinage was simply a temporary precaution. "Whereas," says the Act, "His Majesty has appointed a committee of his Privy Council to take into consideration the state of the coins of this kingdom, and the present establishment and constitution of His Majesty's Mint, and inconvenience may arise from any coinage of silver until such regulations may be framed as shall appear necessary; and whereas from the present low price of silver bullion, owing to temporary circumstances, a small quantity of silver bullion has been brought to the Mint to be coined, and there is reason to suppose that a still further quantity may be brought, and it is therefore necessary to suspend the coining of silver for the present, be it therefore enacted that no silver bullion shall be coined at the Mint, nor shall any silver coin that may have been coined there be delivered."

There can be little doubt that this enactment was due to Lord Liverpool, and if so that it was intended as an arrest, with a particular intent or bearing; for Liverpool had formed his conception of a monetary theory as early as 1773. None the less it is quite inadmissible to state, as has been done, that this restriction, so evidently and expressly only a temporary or interim measure of self-defence, was equivalent to a placing upon the statute-book of Lord Liverpool's gold monometallical theory. There was as yet no restriction on the legal tender of silver. It was still legal tender to any amount,--it was indeed the standard coin of the realm,--only, in order to avoid the effects of depreciation, and to prevent further depreciation, it was now the law of the land that payments of silver of sums over £25 should be made by weight, and the further coinage of silver was temporarily stopped.

This was not a gold monometallic system, and the Act which established that system was passed eight years after the death of Lord Liverpool, and six years after the Bullion Report of 1810 had been printed.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: THE BANK RESTRICTION]

Further than incidentally it is inconsistent with the design of this book to refer to the period of suspension of cash payments and the Bullion Report. These latter are banking phenomena, and will find their place in a treatise of currency in the fuller acceptance of the term, rather than in a treatise definitely restricted to the subject of the metallic currencies. The events of 1797 which led to the suspension,--the remittances to the Continent for war purposes, a failure of credit, a run on the country banks, and then upon the London banks,--had been experienced in 1793 as acutely as in 1797; and, according to the express statement of the report itself, even in the years 1796 and 1797, when the country bankers were making great demands in order to increase their deposits, the market price of gold never rose above the Mint price. These events were therefore one phase of the internal experiences of the country, and have no relation to an international outflow of gold, caused by the heightened ratio which definitely set in in 1794. On the mere ground of first principles, therefore, it is inadmissible to make argumentative use of this event, known as the Bank Restriction, for judgment and illustration in the wider question of bimetallism. Further, the argumentative use that has been made of it--viz. that if from 1773 to 1797 England had possessed a true rather than a halting bimetallic régime, she would have been supplied by its means with an amount of silver that would have increased the metallic reserve and strength of the country, and enabled it to avoid suspension--is inadmissible: and the argument itself is untenable. Such bimetallic action supplying silver could only have begun to operate in 1794, three years before the suspension. It could only have operated by substituting one metal for the other, not by adding silver to gold, but by taking away higher valued gold, and furnishing lower valued silver, i.e. by actually decreasing the metallic strength and reserve of the kingdom. And, lastly, there is the peculiar fact still requiring explaining, that the years of the bank restriction, until, that is, the new Mint law of 1816, saw the heaviest export of silver probably that England has ever experienced. During the ten years, 1801-10, nearly 10 millions sterling of silver was exported from England (over 38,176,016 oz.), while the gold exports amounted only to £2,088,483, so that, of the total export, silver formed 82 per cent. (net amounts used in both cases). It is still well known to what straits this export of silver put the country. In almost every town where there was any employment of labour the tradesmen were obliged to issue token money of their own--shilling tokens, sixpenny tokens, half-crown and five-shilling promissory-notes. Every conceivable form of hand-to-mouth unauthorised currency was resorted to, in order to relieve the needs of the situation caused by the want of silver coins. And stories are still remembered of the straits to which the working classes were driven in order to make their purchases at the week end with one pound notes, for which they could get no change. The explanation of such a phenomenon can only be that the one pound notes having driven gold out of circulation, by a law which is merely another form of the bimetallic law, left only silver available for remittance to the Continent for loans and war purpose. But, whatever the explanation, the fact cuts the ground from under the argument that bimetallism would have saved England from the bank restriction. If silver had not been legal tender to any amount (up to £25 by tale, and beyond that by weight), or again if it had been protected by an agio in 1808 as it was in 1816, it could not have left the country. The straits of the poorer classes in those years of hardship were _due_ to the existing bimetallic system, and to it must, therefore, be attributed the aggravation rather than alleviation of the bank restriction.

If anything is required to confirm such view it can be found in the very terms of that statute of 1816 (56 Geo. III. c. 68), which established the gold standard in England. They reveal the fact that the Act was not so much a philosophical or theoretical declaration of monometallism, such as might have been expected if Lord Liverpool had still lived to dictate it, but a measure for the protection of and relating almost entirely to silver.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: THE ACT OF 1816]

"Whereas the silver coins of the realm have, by long use and other circumstances, become greatly diminished in number and deteriorated in value, so as not to be sufficient for the payments required in dealings under the value of the current gold coins, by reason whereof a great quantity of light and counterfeit silver coin and foreign coin has been introduced into circulation within this realm, and the evils resulting therefrom can only be remedied by a new coinage of silver money...."

The Act therefore prescribes the coining of silver, 11 oz. 2 dwts. fine, at a tale after the rate of 66s. per Troy pound, whether the same be coined in crowns, half-crowns, shillings, or sixpences, or pieces of a lower denomination, but to be issued to the importer of the silver, or to the public, after a rate of 62s. per pound Troy.

"And whereas at various times heretofore the coins of this realm of gold and silver have been usually a legal tender for payments to any amount, and great inconvenience has arisen from both these precious metals being concurrently the standard measure of value and equivalent of property, it is expedient that the gold coin made according to the indentures of the Mint should henceforth be the sole standard measure of value and legal tender for payment, without any limitation of amount, and that the silver coin should be a legal tender to a limited amount only, for the facility of exchange and commerce." The Act therefore prescribes the limit of 40s. for the tender of silver.

This Act was repealed, but in substance re-enacted by the Coinage Act of 1870, and is still in principle and fact the law of the land and the basis of our monometallic system.

From the date of its enactment England has been withdrawn from that action of bimetallic law which had been her bane for centuries. The flow of gold in or out became automatic, representing the natural flow of world-balances, and therefore proving the greatest trade help and indicator; and such commercial crises as have come upon her have arisen from the peculiarly sensitive organisation of credit which distinguishes the modern system, and are to be classed with banking rather than metallic currency phenomena.

The total coinage in England from 1816 to 1875 inclusive was £234,139,886 gold and £24,663,309 silver.

[Sidenote: ENGLAND: 1816-93]

+-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | | Coinage of | Imports of Gold | Exports of Gold | | Year. | Gold. | Bullion and | Bullion and | | | | Specie. | Specie. | +-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | 1855 | 9,008,663 | ? | 11,847,000 | | 1856 | 6,002,114 | ? | 12,038,000 | | 1857 | 485,980 | ? | 15,062,000 | | 1858 | 1,231,023 | 22,793,000 | 12,567,000 | | 1859 | 2,649,509 | 22,298,000 | 18,081,000 | | 1860 | 3,121,709 | 12,585,000 | 15,642,000 | | 1861 | 8,190,170 | 12,164,000 | 11,238,000 | | 1862 | 7,836,413 | 19,904,000 | 16,012,000 | | 1863 | 6,607,456 | 19,143,000 | 15,303,000 | | 1864 | 9,535,597 | 16,901,000 | 13,280,000 | | 1865 | 2,367,614 | 14,486,000 | 8,493,000 | | 1866 | 5,076,676 | 23,510,000 | 12,742,000 | | 1867 | 496,397 | 15,800,000 | 7,889,000 | | 1868 | 1,653,384 | 17,136,000 | 12,708,000 | | 1869 | 7,372,204 | 13,771,000 | 8,474,000 | | 1870 | 2,313,384 | 18,807,000 | 10,014,000 | | 1871 | 9,919,656 | 21,619,000 | 20,698,000 | | 1872 | 15,261,442 | 18,469,000 | 19,749,000 | | 1873 | 3,384,568 | 20,611,000 | 19,071,000 | | 1874 | 1,461,565 | 18,081,000 | 10,642,000 | | 1875 | 243,264 | 23,141,000 | 18,648,000 | | 1876 | 4,696,648 | 23,476,000 | 16,516,000 | | 1877 | 981,468 | 15,442,000 | 20,374,000 | | 1878 | 2,265,069 | 20,871,000 | 14,969,000 | | 1879 | 35,050 | 13,369,000 | 17,579,000 | | 1880 | 4,150,052 | 9,455,000 | 11,829,000 | | 1881 | ... | 9,963,000 | 15,499,000 | | 1882 | ... | 14,377,000 | 12,024,000 | | 1883 | 1,403,713 | 7,756,000 | 7,091,000 | | 1884 | 2,324,015 | 10,744,000 | 12,013,000 | | 1885 | 2,973,453 | 13,377,000 | 11,931,000 | | 1886 | ... | 13,392,000 | 13,784,000 | | 1887 | 1,908,686 | 9,955,000 | 9,324,000 | | 1888 | 2,277,424 | 15,000,000 | 14,250,000 | | 1889 | 7,257,455 | 17,570,000 | 14,000,000 | | 1890 | 7,662,898 | 23,900,000 | 14,250,000 | | 1891 | 6,869,119 | 29,500,000 | 25,000,000 | | 1892 | 13,944,963 | 21,250,000 | 15,450,000 | | 1893 | 9,318,021 | 23,630,000 | 18,800,000 | +-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+

+-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | | Coinage of | Imports of Silver | Exports of Silver | | Year. | Silver. | Bullion and | Bullion and | | | | Specie. | Specie. | +-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | 1855 | 195,510 | ? | 6,981,000 | | 1856 | 462,528 | ? | 12,813,000 | | 1857 | 373,230 | ? | 18,505,000 | | 1858 | 445,896 | 6,700,000 | 7,062,000 | | 1859 | 647,064 | 14,772,000 | 17,608,000 | | 1860 | 218,403 | 10,394,000 | 9,893,000 | | 1861 | 209,484 | 6,583,000 | 9,573,000 | | 1862 | 148,518 | 11,753,000 | 13,314,000 | | 1863 | 161,172 | 10,888,000 | 11,241,000 | | 1864 | 535,194 | 10,827,000 | 9,853,000 | | 1865 | 501,732 | 6,977,000 | 6,599,000 | | 1866 | 493,416 | 10,777,000 | 8,897,000 | | 1867 | 193,842 | 8,021,000 | 6,435,000 | | 1868 | 301,356 | 7,716,000 | 7,512,000 | | 1869 | 76,428 | 6,730,000 | 7,904,000 | | 1870 | 336,798 | 10,649,000 | 8,906,000 | | 1871 | 701,514 | 16,522,000 | 13,062,000 | | 1872 | 1,243,836 | 11,139,000 | 10,587,000 | | 1873 | 674 | 12,988,000 | 9,828,000 | | 1874 | 890,604 | 12,298,000 | 12,212,000 | | 1875 | 594,000 | 10,124,000 | 8,980,000 | | 1876 | 222,354 | 13,578,000 | 12,948,000 | | 1877 | 420,948 | 21,711,000 | 19,437,000 | | 1878 | 613,998 | 11,552,000 | 11,718,000 | | 1879 | 549,054 | 10,787,000 | 11,006,000 | | 1880 | 761,508 | 6,799,000 | 7,061,000 | | 1881 | 997,128 | 6,901,000 | 7,004,000 | | 1882 | 209,880 | 9,243,000 | 8,965,000 | | 1883 | 1,274,328 | 9,468,000 | 9,323,000 | | 1884 | 658,548 | 9,633,000 | 9,986,000 | | 1885 | 720,918 | 9,434,000 | 9,852,000 | | 1886 | 417,384 | 7,472,000 | 7,224,000 | | 1887 | 861,498 | 7,819,000 | 7,807,000 | | 1888 | 755,113 | 6,000,000 | 7,500,000 | | 1889 | 2,215,742 | 9,000,000 | 10,500,000 | | 1890 | 1,708,415 | 10,300,000 | 10,500,000 | | 1891 | 1,049,113 | 10,500,000 | 11,800,000 | | 1892 | 773,353 | 12,375,000 | 14,075,000 | | 1893 | 1,089,707 | 11,320,000 | 13,532,000 | +-------+-------------+-------------------+-------------------+

United States

Under British dominion the American colonies retained the silver standard, as did their mother country, with such variation of actual coins and of their tariff as the situation of the country and the immense variety of metallic values prevailing in the different colonies gave rise to. The coin most commonly current was the Spanish _piece of eight_, but the system of weights and measures was the English system, and reckoning was by pounds, shillings, and pence. The method by which such a composite system was regulated consisted in those coinage tariffs with which early European monetary history is so well acquainted. According to a tariff issued in 1750, the ounce of silver was declared worth 6s. 8d. the Spanish milled _piece of eight_ was to be equal to 6s.; and "whereas there is great reason to apprehend that many and great inconveniences may arise in case any coined silver or gold or English halfpence and farthings should pass at any higher rate than in a just proportion to Spanish pieces of eight, or coined silver at the ratio aforesaid," a tariff list was appended according to which the guinea was 28s., the _English crown_ 6s. 8d., and so on for other European coins.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: MORRIS'S SCHEME, 1782]

In accordance with this system the earliest financial steps of the Continental Congress in 1775--its issues of bills of credit--were based upon, and the bills were declared payable in, the Spanish _dollar_ or _piece of eight_, to which, on the report of a special commission, appointed on 19th April 1776, the various gold and silver coins circulating by different standards in different colonies were rated by a tariff. According to this tariff the guinea weighing 5 dwts. 8 grs. was to be equivalent to 4-2/3 dollars, and the English crown equal to 1-1/9 dollar.

Gold bullion was rated 17 dollars per oz. Troy weight; sterling silver at 1-1/9 dollar per oz.

Assuming the coins to be of full weight, the ratio here established is nearly the English ratio of 15.21. The ratio for bullion is slightly different, but hardly materially.

Six years later, at the request of a committee of Congress, the superintendent of finance, Robert Morris, submitted a scheme for a national coinage (15th January 1782). This scheme is remarkable for its clear-sightedness and grasp, as well as the testimony it bore to the European monetary system of the time. After deciding on silver as a necessary unit, the report thus proceeds:--

"The various coins which have circulated in America have undergone different changes in their value, so that there is hardly any which can be considered as a general standard unless it be Spanish dollars. These pass in Georgia at 5s., in North Carolina and New York at 8s., in Virginia and the four Eastern States at 6s., in all the other States except South Carolina at 7s. 6d., and in South Carolina at 32s. 6d."

As a common denominator, calculated from part of these figures, Morris proposed a monetary unit of 1/4-grain in fine silver, the multiples to be by the decimal system, the dollar containing 1440 units, and the Mint price of fine silver being 22,237 units per pound.

On the following 21st February 1782 Congress approved of the establishment of a Mint, and directed Morris to prepare and report a plan for conducting it.

In a concurrent paper of notes on the establishment of a money unit, and of a coinage for the United States, Jefferson proposed, in opposition to Morris's scheme, a decimal system resting on the dollar, and with a ratio of 15:1.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: REPORT OF 1785]

"Just principles," he says, after stating the legal ratio in the chief European countries, "will lead us to disregard legal proportions altogether, to inquire into the market price of gold in the several countries with which we shall be principally connected in commerce, and to take an average from them. Perhaps we might well safely lean to a proportion somewhat above par for gold, considering our neighbourhood and commerce with the sources of the coins, and the tendency which the high price of gold in Spain has to draw thither all that of their mines, leaving silver principally for our and other markets."

The settlement of the matter was, however, delayed, although in the course of the year Morris declared that "all our dollars are rapidly going to the enemy in exchange for light gold, which must eventually cause a considerable loss and a scarcity of silver which will be seriously felt."

In this undetermined state the matter rested till 13th May 1785, when the grand committee on the money unit made its report.

The proposed ratio was justified thus: "In France 1 grain of pure gold is counted worth 15 grs. of silver. In Spain 16 grs. of silver are exchanged for 1 of gold, and in England 15-1/5. In both England and Spain gold is the prevailing money, because silver is undervalued. In France silver prevails. Sundry advantages would arise to us from a system by which silver might become the prevailing money. This would operate as a bounty to draw it from our neighbours, by whom it is not sufficiently esteemed. Silver is not exported so easily as gold, and it is a more useful metal. Certainly our exchange should not be more than 15 grs. of silver for 1 of gold." The charge for coinage was to be 2-1/2 per cent. for gold, and slightly over 3 per cent. for silver. The unit was to be a dollar of 362 grs. of pure silver, with a multiple gold piece (5 dollars) and decimal aliquot pieces.

On the 6th July following, 1785, the Congress by vote adopted the silver dollar as the basis of the currency on a decimal system, but the resolution was not followed by the establishment of a Mint, although the States were experiencing great loss by the circulation of base copper coins made in Birmingham.

On the 8th April 1786, a report was made in triplicate by the Board of Treasury to the President of Congress, the first of the three forms of the report advocating a silver dollar of 375.64 grs. fine and a ratio of 15.256. These proposals were adopted by resolution on the 8th August following, and on the 16th October of the same year, 1786, the ordinance for the establishment of the Mint of the United States of America, and for regulating the value and alloy of coin, finally passed Congress.

In accordance with the resolutions of 8th August, the mint price of the pound Troy of gold (11 parts fine) was fixed at 209 dols. 7 dimes, 7 cents, and of silver at 13 dols. 7 dimes, 7 cents, and 7 mills.

The Mint charge here comprised is about 2 per cent. on both silver and gold, "bringing the ratio of bullion at the Mint to 15.22, a little below the ratio in the coin."

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: HAMILTON'S REPORT, 1791]

For several years all these regulations of Congress were not put in force, and it was not until 5th May 1791 that the matter was again brought before the Senate by the report of the Secretary of the Treasury, Alexander Hamilton.

Hamilton's scheme, as contained in his most remarkable paper, was for a silver unit or dollar of 371-1/4 grs. of pure silver and a ratio of 15, and instead of the allowance of 2 per cent. for waste and coinage the principle was adopted of free coinage--of delivering at the Mint the same weight of pure metal coined as should be brought to it in bullion or foreign coin. Hamilton justifies his ratio thus: "The difference established by custom in the United States between coined gold and coined silver has been stated to be nearly 1:15.6. This, if truly the case, would imply that gold was extremely overvalued in the United States, for the _highest actual_ proportion in any part of Europe very little, if at all, exceeds 1:15, and the average proportion throughout Europe is probably not more than 1:14.8." He also deduces his ratio of 15 as a mean between the two lately preceding issues of dollars. "Taking the rate of the late dollar of 374 grs., the proportion would be as 1:15.11. Taking the rate of the newest dollar of 374 grs., the proportion would be as 1:14.87. The mean of the two would give the proportion of 1:15 very nearly, less than the legal proportion in the coins of Great Britain, which is as 1:15.2, but somewhat more than the actual or market proportion, which is not quite 1:15." As to the express selection of one or other metal for the unit, Hamilton makes a departure which marks clearly that he was creating and not continuing a system, and that if bimetallism is a feature of modern conception that conception is due to American rather than French statesmanship:[18]--"Contrary to the ideas which have heretofore prevailed in the suggestions concerning a coinage for the United States, though not without much hesitation arising from a deference for those ideas, the secretary is, upon the whole, strongly inclined to the opinion that a preference ought to be given to neither of the metals for the monetary unit ... because this cannot be done effectually without destroying the office and character of one of them as money and reducing it to the situation of mere merchandise, which, accordingly, at different times, has been proposed from different and very reputable quarters, but which would probably be a greater evil than occasional variations in the unit, from the fluctuations in the relative value of the metals, especially if care be taken to regulate the proportion between them, with an eye to their average commercial value. To annul the use of either of the metals as money is to abridge the quantity of circulating medium."

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: SCHEME OF 1792]

This scheme was accepted in its entirety by the Act of 2nd April 1792, with the slight change that the standard of silver was changed from 11/12 to 1485/1664 fine. The silver dollar, therefore, weighed 416 grs. gross (371-1/4 grs. pure silver); on this basis, at a ratio of 15, the equivalent gold piece would contain 24.75 grs. (371-1/4/25 = 27-3/4). This was accordingly established as the basis of the gold _eagle_ or ten-dollar piece, which was to contain 270 grs. gross (247.5 grs. pure gold).[19] The Act was followed by another on the 9th February 1793, for regulating the rate of foreign coins. The gold coins of Great Britain and Portugal of their then standard were made a legal tender for the payment of all debts and demands, at the rate of 100 cents for every 27 grs. of their actual weight, those of France and Spain at the rate of 100 cents for every 27-2/5 grains.

For a period the system established in 1792 went on, although the ratio established was prejudicial to gold. But, twenty years after, the natural result arrived in America, as in England, and the circulation of gold was completely extinguished in the States by the unseen withdrawal of the metal.

In obedience to a resolution of the Senate of 3rd March 1817, John Quincy Adams, Secretary of State, produced a report on weights and measures, in which he impugned the correctness of the data on which Hamilton had based his reckoning in 1791.

Two years later, 26th January 1819, a committee of the House reported an ill-considered scheme, recommending a change in the ratio in favour of gold, and the imposition of a heavy seigniorage on silver. On the 1st of March following, the House of Representatives directed the secretary to report such measures as might be expedient to procure and retain a sufficient quantity of gold and silver coin in the United States.

In this report, in referring to one feature in the previous crisis, namely, the necessity in 1814 for the suspension of specie payments, Secretary Crawford stated that, from the commencement of the war until that event of 1814, a large amount of specie was taken out of the United States by the sale of English Government bills, at a discount frequently of 15 to 20 per cent.

He concluded by suggesting a raising of the value of gold in relation to silver, 5 per cent., implying a ratio of 15.75.

In the report to the House of Representatives, dated 17th March 1832, quite a different statement was made, namely, that there was no export of gold from the United States from 1792 to 1821, and that "there were certainly no indications that gold was rated too low in our standard of 1:15 earlier than 1821, when the English demand commenced."

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: GOLD EXPORT OF 1820]

The terms of the report of the committee on the currency, which was communicated to the House of Representatives on the 2nd February 1821, must be contrasted with this statement. "The committee are of opinion that the value of American gold compared with silver ought to be somewhat higher than by law at present established. On inquiry they find that gold coins, both foreign and of the United States, have in a great measure disappeared, and from the best calculation that can be made there is reason to apprehend they will be wholly banished from circulation, and it ought not to be a matter of surprise, under our present regulations, that this should be the case.... There have been coined at the Mint of the United States 6 millions of dollars in gold. It is doubtful whether any considerable portion of it can at this time be found within the United States.... It is ascertained that the gold coin, in an office of discount and deposit of the Bank of the United States in November 1819, amounted to 165,000 dollars and the silver coin to 118,000; that since that time the silver coin has increased to 700,000 dollars, while the gold coin has diminished to 1200 dollars, 100 only of which is American."[20]

The committee proposed a bill in the sense of their report, but for seven years--years of acute commercial crises and distress--no actual step was taken. In November of the following year the subject of the disappearance of gold from the currency was brought before the lower house of Congress by Mr. Lowndes. In December 1828, however, the Senate required the Secretary of the Treasury to ascertain the ratio and to state such alterations in the gold coins as might be necessary to conform those coins to the silver coins in their true relative value.

In his report Secretary Ingham insisted on the advantage of a single standard, but, in case of a determination to maintain both gold and silver, he proposed to approximate as near as could be to the French system by establishing a ratio of 15.625. In case of no change of the ratio he proposed to discontinue the gold coinage, whenever the premium for gold should exceed 2 per cent.

No action was taken on these reports, nor on the similar proceedings in the two following years, nor very little more on the report which in June 1832 the select committee on coins produced. Part of the instructions given to this committee were "to inquire into the expediency of making silver the only legal tender, and of coining and issuing gold coins of a fixed weight and fineness, which shall be received in payment of all debts to the United States, at such ratio as may be fixed from time to time but shall not otherwise be a legal tender."

In the House of Representatives the converse proposition of a gold standard with a restricted legal tender had been made by M. Wilde, 26th March 1832, but when the report appeared it advocated a silver standard.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: THE ACT OF 1834]

While Congress was thus delaying over a vital question the New York bankers, May 1834, pressed for the regulation of the gold coins, so as to retain them in the country.

Two months later, 31st July 1834, the long-sought measure passed, but in an extraordinary form. At a blow the ratio was changed from 1:15 to 1:16 (15.988), by the reduction of the weight of the fine gold in the gold coins to 23.20 Troy grains, soon afterwards, by an Act of 18th July 1837, changed to 23.22 grains, the standard being changed at the same time from 11/12 to 9/10 fine.

The motives and amount of wisdom which underlay this sudden close of a long period of agitation can be measured from Benton's own words, in his _Thirty Years' View_:--

"A measure of relief was now at hand, before which the machinery of distress was to balk and cease its long and cruel labours--it was the passage of the bill for equalising the value of gold and silver and legalising the tender of foreign coins of both metals. The bills were brought forward in the House by Mr. Campbell H. White of New York, and passed after an animated contest in which the chief question was as to the true relative value of the two metals, varied by some into a preference for National Bank paper; 15-5/8 was the ratio of nearly all who seemed best calculated from their pursuits to understand the subject. The thick array of speakers was on that side, and the eighteen banks of the city of New York, with Mr. Gallatin at their head, favoured that proportion. The difficulty of adjusting this value, so that neither metal should expel the other had been the stumblingblock for a great many years, and now this seemed to be as formidable as ever. Refined calculations were gone into, scientific light was sought, history was rummaged back to the times of the Roman Empire; and there seemed to be no way of getting to a concord of opinion either from the light of science, the voice of history, or the result of calculations. The author of this _View_ had, in his speeches on the subject, taken up the question in a practical point of view, regardless of history and calculations and the opinions of bank officers; and looking to the actual and equal circulation of the two metals in different countries he saw that this equality and actuality of circulation had existed for above three hundred years in the Spanish dominions of Mexico and South America, where the proportion was 16:1. Taking his stand upon this single fact, as the practical test which solved the question, all the real friends of the gold currency soon rallied to it. Mr. White gave up the bill which he had first introduced, and adopted the Spanish ratio. Mr. Clowney of South Carolina, Mr. Gillet, and Mr. Cambreleng of New York, Mr. Ewing of Indiana, Mr. McKim of Maryland, and other speakers gave it a warm support. Mr. John Quincy Adams would vote for it, though he thought the gold was overvalued, but if found to be so the difference could be corrected hereafter. The principal speakers against it and in favour of a lower rate were Messrs. Gorham of Massachusetts, Selden of New York, Binney of Pennsylvania, and Wilde of Georgia, and eventually the bill was passed by a large majority, 145 to 35. In the Senate it had an easy passage. Messrs. Calhoun and Webster supported it, Mr. Clay opposed it; and on the final vote there were but seven negatives--Messrs. Chambers of Maryland, Clay, Knight of Rhode Island, Alexander Porter of Louisiana, Silsbee of Massachusetts, Southard of New Jersey, Sprague of Maine. The good effects of the bill were immediately seen. Gold began to flow into the country through all the channels of commerce, old chests gave up their hordes, the Mint was busy; and in a few months, as if by magic, a currency banished from the country for thirty years overspread the land and gave joy and confidence to all the pursuits of industry."

The panacea thus magnificently lauded soon proved itself worse than inefficient. The ratio was too high, and the silver dollars could not be maintained. They were unduly exported, especially between the years 1848 and 1851. And in order to retain within the country a sufficient amount of small coin the amount of silver in the small coins, from the half-dollar downwards, was reduced by an Act of 24th February 1853. It was at the same time provided that they should be coined only on Government account, and they were made legal tender only up to the sum of five-dollars.

The direction of this step will be seen at a glance--it was in the direction of the gold valuation. This is as plainly the case as it was in the Latin Union, already exemplified (p. 190). Further, it was so conceived and explicitly stated by Dunham, who piloted the bill through the House. "We have had," he said, "but a single standard for the last three or four years. That has been and now is gold. We propose to let it remain so, and to adapt silver to it, to regulate it by it." Legally, the old silver dollar was left untouched, and the gold and silver valuation was not expressly abolished. No reference whatever was made to the silver dollar in the Act, for the simple reason that for years nothing had been seen of them. They did not and could not circulate. There was plenty of gold, and the absence of silver with the change in standard therein practically implied was either unnoticed, or regarded, if at all, only with indifference.

The final step in the simplification and unification of this system was commenced in 1870, when a bill was prepared for a revised coinage law with a pure gold standard, silver being demonetised as a legal tender money. The bill did not become law till 12th April 1873. And no opposition was expressed in either the House of Representatives or the Senate to the abolition of the double standard. The silver dollars previously coined (of which, however, but few were in existence) maintained their quality as legal tender; but the coining of new dollars, whether on Government or private account, was forbidden.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: THE LEGISLATION OF 1873-74]

This Act was therefore simply the complement of the preceding legislation of 1853.

The completion of this system thus established was provided in section 3586 of the Revised Statutes of 1874, by which the silver coins of the United States were declared legal tender only up to five dollars, thus completing, from December 1873 onwards, the demonetisation of silver, and the establishment of gold monometallism on the English plan. As an effective scheme it meant little because of the prevalence of paper.

Within a very short time of the passing of this bill, however, began the great change in the relative value of the precious metals which has continued since. The silver-producing interest, at that moment on the eve of receiving an enormous accession of strength by the Nevada finds, made itself heard. At the same time the prospect of the resumption of cash payments brought an additional incentive and interest. A commission to investigate the question of standard was therefore appointed, 14th August 1875, and a majority of this commission recommended the establishment of the double standard. Thereupon Bland, one of the members of the commission, proposed in the House of Representatives the re-establishment of the double standard, at the old ratio of 1:15.988, with free coinage of silver.

The question of resumption was pressing near. On the 1st January 1879 the States were to return to cash payments. On what basis should that return be effected? Should the Act of 1873 be maintained, or should a return be made to the bimetallic system which had prevailed before then? The Government was of the former opinion; the majority of Congress of the latter.

The silver party, finding the measure could not be carried over the veto of the president, agreed to a compromise, under which the free coinage clause was dropped, and it was as a compromise that the Bland Act so-called, the "Act to authorise the coinage of the standard silver dollar, and to restore its legal tender character," passed on the 28th February 1878.

To the favourers of a gold system it was conceded that in the maintenance of the previous legal ratio of 15.988, the silver dollar should be reserved for Treasury reckonings, and a maximum minting limit of 4 million dollars monthly should be fixed. The bimetallists gained the fixing of a minimum limit of 2 million dollars monthly of silver coinage, and the clause enjoining the President of the United States to take steps for the meeting of an international conference.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: BLAND AND SHERMAN ACTS]

This scheme became law immediately, and on the 1st January 1879 the United States resumed specie payment. As far as the actual circulation of the country is concerned this return is only nominally effective. The habit of employing redeemable paper had grown too strong and continuous, and even the rule of the New York banking-houses, to employ only gold in clearing-house settlements, has been formally, though not absolutely, abolished by the Act of Congress of 12th July 1882, which provided that no national bank should be a member of a clearing-house at which gold and silver certificates were not accepted in payment of balances. The Bland Bill deceived the hope of both parties, as such a compromise might be expected to do. It remained in force, notwithstanding, till August 1890, and during the twelve years, 1878-1890, the United States coined a matter of 370 million silver dollars, employing therein 9 million kilogrammes of silver--a third of the total contemporary production.

Almost yearly, up to 1887, the repeal of the silver purchase clauses of the Bland Bill and the suspension of the silver coinage was recommended to Congress by presidential message, and in the reports of the Secretary of the Treasury.

In December 1889 President Harrison and Secretary Windam definitely proposed to cease the coining of silver, and to limit the issues of silver certificates to the value of the silver bullion as deposited, reckoning that value at its then market price. From these proposals sprang, by the same peculiar process of committee gestation which had produced the Bland Act, the compromise which passed on the 14th July 1890, under the title of the Sherman Act.

This act represents a compromise not of principles but of self-seeking interests. The main regulations of the law, which came into force on the 13th August 1890, were:--

1. The Secretary of the Treasury is to purchase silver to not more than the monthly amount of 4,500,000 oz. at the market price, so long as that price is below 129.29 cents per oz.

2, 3. To issue Treasury notes against the purchases, the said notes to be full legal tender, and capable of forming part of bank reserves.

5. Up to 1st July 1891, 2 million oz. monthly of this silver to be coined into dollars. That coinage to cease after the date specified, except so far as necessary to secure the Treasury notes. At the same time the Act declares the intention of the American Government to preserve the parity of gold and silver.

The fillip given by this legislation to the price of silver was over in a moment, and almost immediately the question recurred for pressing consideration, on the strong demand of the silver party for free coinage in place of these as yet ineffectual purchase schemes. The impotent close of the international monetary conference at Brussels, in February 1893, was followed by the Act of the Governor-General of India in Council of June 26th closing the Indian Mint to the free coinage of silver. Left practically alone in her stand in defence of silver, America, in the simple interest of her gold reserve, was obliged to abandon the field, and after a bitter fight the repeal of the clauses of the Sherman Act, which had enacted the compulsory purchase of silver, was carried in November 1893.

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: COINAGE 1793-1893]

We are too near the event to estimate these later developments of the situation, but as yet two remarkable facts have hinged upon this report--(1) the immediate depreciation of the value of silver and the effect on the export of silver to India were not such as might _a priori_ have been conjectured; (2) the ceasing of the silver purchase deprived the currency of the United States of its only remaining element capable of expansion, and of all the countries of the world the United States stands most in need of an expanding and expansible currency.

COINAGE OF THE MINTS OF THE UNITED STATES.[21]

+--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+ | Years. | Gold | Silver || Years. | Gold | Silver | | | (Dollars). | (Dollars). || | (Dollars). | (Dollars). | |--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+ | 1793-5 | 71,485.00 | 370,683.80 || 1813 | 477,140.00 | 620,951.50 | | 1796 | 77,960.00 | 77,118.50 || 1814 | 77,270.00 | 561,687.50 | | 1797 | 128,190.00 | 14,550.45 || 1815 | 3,175.00 | 17,308.00 | | 1798 | 205,610.00 | 330,291.00 || 1816 | ... | 28,575.75 | | 1799 | 213,285.00 | 423,515.00 || 1817 | ... | 607,783.50 | | 1800 | 317,760.00 | 224,296.00 || 1818 | 242,940.00 | 1,070,454.00 | | 1801 | 422,570.00 | 74,758.00 || 1819 | 258,615.00 | 1,140,000.00 | | 1802 | 423,310.00 | 58,343.00 || 1820 | 1,319,030.00 | 501,680.70 | | 1803 | 258,377.50 | 87,118.00 || 1821 | 189,325.00 | 825,762.45 | | 1804 | 258,642.50 | 100,340.50 || 1822 | 88,080.00 | 805,806.50 | | 1805 | 170,367.50 | 149,388.50 || 1823 | 72,425.00 | 895,550.00 | | 1806 | 324,505.00 | 471,319.00 || 1824 | 93,200.00 | 1,752,477.00 | | 1807 | 437,495.00 | 597,448.75 || 1825 | 156,385.00 | 1,564,583.00 | | 1808 | 284,665.00 | 684,300.00 || 1826 | 92,245.00 | 2,002,090.00 | | 1809 | 169,375.00 | 707,376.00 || 1827 | 131,565.00 | 2,869,200.00 | | 1810 | 501,435.00 | 638,773.50 || 1828 | 140,145.00 | 1,575,600.00 | | 1811 | 497,905.00 | 608,340.00 || 1829 | 295,717.50 | 1,994,578.00 | | 1812 | 290,435.00 | 814,029.50 || 1830 | 643,105.00 | 2,495,400.00 | +--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+

+--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+ | Years. | Gold | Silver || Years. | Gold | Silver | | | (Dollars). | (Dollars). || | (Dollars). | (Dollars). | |--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+ | 1831 | 714,270.00 | 3,175,600.00 || 1863 | 22,445,482.00 | 809,267.80 | | 1832 | 798,435.00 | 2,579,000.00 || 1864 | 20,081,415.00 | 609,917.10 | | 1833 | 978,550.00 | 2,759,000.00 || 1865 | 28,295,107.50 | 691,005.00 | | 1834 | 3,954,270.00 | 3,415,002.00 || 1866 | 31,435,945.00 | 982,409.25 | | 1835 | 2,186,175.00 | 3,443,003.00 || 1867 | 23,828,625.00 | 908,876.25 | | 1836 | 4,135,700.00 | 3,606,100.00 || 1868 | 19,371,387.50 | 1,074,343.00 | | 1837 | 1,148,305.00 | 2,096,010.00 || 1869 | 17,582,987.50 | 1,266,143.00 | | 1838 | 1,809,765.00 | 2,333,243.40 || 1870 | 23,198,787.50 | 1,378,255.50 | | 1839 | 1,376,847.50 | 2,209,778.00 || 1871 | 21,032,685.00 | 3,104,038.30 | | 1840 | 1,675,482.50 | 1,726,703.00 || 1872 | 21,812,645.00 | 2,504,488.50 | | 1841 | 1,091,857.50 | 1,132,750.00 || 1873 | 57,022,747.50 | 4,024,747.60 | | 1842 | 1,829,407.50 | 2,332,750.00 || 1874 | 35,254,630.00 | 6,851,776.70 | | 1843 | 8,108,797.50 | 3,834,750.00 || 1875 | 32,951,940.00 | 15,347,893.00 | | 1844 | 5,427,670.00 | 2,235,550.00 || 1876 | 46,579,452.50 | 24,503,307.50 | | 1845 | 3,756,447.50 | 1,873,200.00 || 1877 | 43,999,864.00 | 28,393,045.50 | | 1846 | 4,034,177.50 | 2,558,580.00 || 1878 | 49,786,052.00 | 28,518,850.00 | | 1847 | 20,202,325.00 | 2,374,450.00 || 1879 | 39,080,080.00 | 27,569,776.00 | | 1848 | 3,775,512.00 | 2,040,050.00 || 1880 | 62,308,279.00 | 27,411,693.75 | | 1849 | 9,007,761.50 | 2,114,950.00 || 1881 | 96,850,890.00 | 27,940,163.75 | | 1850 | 31,981,738.50 | 1,866,100.00 || 1882 | 65,887,685.00 | 27,973,132.00 | | 1851 | 62,614,492.50 | 774,397.00 || 1883 | 29,241,990.00 | 29,246,968.45 | | 1852 | 56,846,187.50 | 999,410.00 || 1884 | 23,991,756.50 | 28,534,866.15 | | 1853 | 39,377,909.00 | 9,077,571.00 || 1885 | 27,773,012.50 | 28,962,176.20 | | 1854 | 25,915,962.50 | 8,619,270.00 || 1886 | 28,945,542.00 | 32,086,709.90 | | 1855 | 29,387,968.00 | 3,501,245.00 || 1887 | 23,972,383.00 | 35,191,081.40 | | 1856 | 36,857,768.50 | 5,142,240.00 || 1888 | 31,380,808.00 | 33,025,606.45 | | 1857 | 32,214,540.00 | 5,478,760.00 || 1889 | 21,413,931.00 | 35,496,683.15 | | 1858 | 22,938,413.50 | 8,495,370.00 || 1890 | 20,467,182.50 | 39,202,908.20 | | 1859 | 14,780,570.00 | 3,284,450.00 || 1891 | 29,222,005.00 | 27,518,856.00 | | 1860 | 23,473,654.00 | 2,259,390.00 || 1892 | 34,787,222.50 | 12,641,078.00 | | 1861 | 83,395,530.00 | 3,783,740.00 || 1893 | 56,997,020.00 | 8,802,797.30 | | 1862 | 20,875,997.50 | 1,252,516.50 || | | | +--------+---------------+--------------++--------+---------------+---------------+

[Sidenote: UNITED STATES: MOVEMENTS OF METALS, 1851-1893]

IMPORT AND EXPORT OF THE PRECIOUS METALS INTO AND FROM THE UNITED STATES.

+------------------------------------------------------------------+ | Gold and Silver. | +--------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | | Import (Dollars). | Export (Dollars). | +--------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | Yearly average, 1851-55 | 5,151,817 | 39,432,522 | | " 1856-60 | 10,385,770 | 59,589,841 | | " 1861-63 | 24,112,923 | 43,611,777 | +--------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+

+-----------------------------------------------------------------+ | Gold. | +-------------------------+---------------------------------------+ | | Import (Dollars). | Export (Dollars). | +-------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | Yearly average, 1864-70 | 11,117,584 | 58,757,484 | | " 1871 | 6,883,561 | 66,686,208 | | " 1872 | 8,717,458 | 49,548,760 | | " 1873 | 8,682,447 | 44,856,715 | | " 1874 | 19,503,137 | 34,042,420 | | " 1875 | 13,696,793 | 66,980,977 | | " 1876 | 7,992,709 | 31,177,050 | | " 1877 | 26,246,234 | 26,590,374 | | " 1878 | 13,330,215 | 9,204,455 | | " 1879 | 5,624,948 | 4,587,614 | | " 1880 | 80,758,396 | 3,639,025 | | " 1881 | 100,031,259 | 2,565,132 | | " 1882 | 34,377,054 | 32,587,880 | | " 1883 | 17,734,149 | 11,600,888 | | " 1884 | 22,831,317 | 41,081,957 | | " 1885 | 26,691,696 | 8,477,892 | | " 1886 | 20,743,349 | 42,952,191 | | " 1887 | 42,910,601 | 9,701,187 | | " 1888 | 43,934,317 | 18,376,234 | | " 1889 | 10,284,858 | 59,951,685 | | " 1890 | 12,943,342 | 17,274,491 | | " 1891 | 45,298,928 | 79,187,499 | | " 1892 | 18,165,056 | 76,735,592 | | " 1893 | 73,280,575 | 80,010,633 | +-------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | Silver. | +-------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+ | Yearly average, 1864-70 | 5,469,798 | 16,818,279 | | " 1871 | 14,382,463 | 31,755,780 | | " 1872 | 5,026,231 | 30,328,774 | | " 1873 | 12,798,490 | 39,751,859 | | " 1874 | 8,951,769 | 32,587,985 | | " 1875 | 7,203,924 | 25,151,165 | | " 1876 | 7,943,972 | 25,329,252 | | " 1877 | 14,528,180 | 29,571,863 | | " 1878 | 16,491,099 | 24,535,670 | | " 1879 | 14,671,052 | 20,409,827 | | " 1880 | 12,275,914 | 13,503,894 | | " 1881 | 10,544,238 | 16,841,715 | | " 1882 | 8,095,336 | 16,829,599 | | " 1883 | 10,755,242 | 20,219,445 | | " 1884 | 14,594,945 | 26,051,326 | | " 1885 | 16,550,627 | 33,753,633 | | " 1886 | 17,850,307 | 2,954,219 | | " 1887 | 17,260,191 | 26,296,504 | | " 1888 | 15,403,189 | 28,027,949 | | " 1889 | 18,678,215 | 36,689,248 | | " 1890 | 21,032,984 | 34,873,929 | | " 1891 | 27,910,193 | 28,783,393 | | " 1892 | 31,450,968 | 37,541,301 | | " 1893 | 27,765,696 | 47,463,399 | +-------------------------+-------------------+-------------------+

In 1878 the currency total of America was thus composed:--

+-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+ | | 1878. | 1879. | +-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+ | Gold (dollars), | 82,500,000 | 123,700,000 | | Silver (dollars), | ... | 11,100,000 | | Silver (small coin), | 53,600,000 | 54,100,000 | | Gold Certificates, | 44,400,000 | 14,800,000 | | Silver Certificates, | ... | 12,000,000 | | State Notes, | 311,400,000 | 327,700,000 | | Notes of the National Banks, | 313,900,000 | 330,000,000 | | +---------------+---------------+ | Totals, | 805,800,000 | 862,600,000 | +-------------------------------+---------------+---------------+

In 1893--

Metallic.

1893. Dollars. Gold bullion, 84,631,966 Silver bullion, 128,479,587 Gold coin, 582,366,998 Silver dollars, 419,332,777 Subsidiary silver coins, 76,267,586 ------------- 1,291,078,914 =============

Paper.

Legal tender notes (old issue), 346,681,016 Legal Tender Notes Act, 14th July 1890, 153,160,151 Gold certificates, 77,487,769 Silver certificates, 334,584,504 National Bank notes, 208,538,844 Currency certificates, 39,085,000 ------------- 1,159,537,284 =============

Of the total of silver dollars in the above, only a matter of 57,869,589 are in circulation. The balance, 361,463,188, are in the Treasury vaults.

[Sidenote: THE NETHERLANDS IN 1816]

Netherlands.

During the eighteenth century the monetary history of the Netherlands loses its central and determining importance. The details of the Mint laws, which precede the later developments of the nineteenth century, are therefore relegated to the Appendix (No. IV. Holland).

When the United Provinces of the Netherlands and Belgium were united under a single sceptre, both countries had an immense variety of coins, for formerly nearly every province claimed a right of coining money. To meet the desire for a simple and single system, a monetary law was passed in 1816 under King William I. Its object was to arrive at a currency having the old florin, called the florin of 200_as_, as the unit. But at the same time a gold piece of 10 florins was allowed. The florin contained 9.63 grms. of silver and the 10-florin piece 6.056 grms. of gold. The ratio was therefore 15.873, whilst in France it was 15-1/2.

Moreover, to respond to the desire of the inhabitants of Belgium, the franc was accepted in the public treasuries, but at too high a rate, viz. at 47-1/2 cents, whereas it was worth only 46.8 cents. The result was that the new 3-florin pieces on leaving the Brussels Mint went to the Lille Mint, to come back in the shape of 5-franc pieces.

The law was languidly carried out. Gold pieces were principally coined, and in proportion as gold was coined it became more and more difficult to coin silver.

In 1830 Belgium was separated from Holland, and it was not till 1844 that the recoining of the old money was seriously undertaken. The monetary law had been already altered in 1839. Side by side with the worn silver coins there were issued 5 or 10-florin gold pieces, which had been coined to the amount of 172-1/2 millions of florins. The worn and clipped silver coins not being available for international transactions, gold formed the basis of exchange. This was regulated not by the florin but by 1/10 of the 10-florin gold piece. All difficulties it was thought could be obviated by adopting a florin of exactly 10 grms. weight, corresponding to the decimal metric system, and .945 fine. As long as the gold coins remained in circulation, and they were of great use while the recoinage was going on, there was thus a bimetallism with a ratio of 1:15.504. From 1842-49 more than 85-1/4 millions of florins in nominal value were called in and were recoined in new silver pieces. The operation cost the State 8 millions of florins, 7 millions being the loss on the old coins.

Before actually commencing the recoinage, the question of standard had been carefully considered. Silver was resolved on. For more than a century and a half the florin had been the unit of all transactions. As the recoinage advanced, further attention was devoted to the necessity of instituting the single standard. By the law of 26th September 1847, the system of single silver standard was adopted. In June 1850 the gold coins were called in. A total of 50 millions, not one-third of what had been coined, was offered by the public. It was sold in 1850-51 by the Government, which thereby lost rather more than 1 million.

[Sidenote: HOLLAND IN 1872]

There is a very noticeable point connected with this reform. The law of September 1847 admitted trade coins in gold by the side of the legal silver coins and fractional money. Besides the ducats, which are still in demand from time to time, there were _Guillaumes d'or_, _double-_ and _half-Guillaumes_. These pieces were inscribed only with the weight and fineness.

This system failed completely. Though the gold Guillaume was coined of the same weight and fineness as the old 10-florin piece, which was much in request, people would not have it. The uncertainty of its value made it unpopular. Between the years 1851 and 1853 only 10,000 Guillaumes, 10,000 half-Guillaumes, and 2636 double-Guillaumes were coined, and since 1853 not a single one has been coined.

All through the Californian and Australian gold finds and until 1872, the price of silver remained stationary for large transactions. Only in small transactions did it exhibit from time to time some slight fluctuations.

From 1847-72 everybody was invariably able to sell his silver to the Netherlands Bank at 104 fl. 65 cents. Bank retained for recoinage, etc 1 fl. 17 cents. ------------------- 105 fl. 82 cents.

which, equal to value of 1 kilogramme of silver, .945, was as by the Netherlands standard.

At Amsterdam also the price of silver did not change.

With the change in 1871 this repose was disturbed. A commission was thereupon appointed, in October 1872, to consider the situation, which reported in the following December. It proposed to prohibit the free minting of silver, and this was enacted by the law of 21st May 1873. As long as there was still a hope of Germany continuing her old system, the commission merely proposed to coin a gold piece side by side with the silver money. When, however, Germany adopted the gold standard, the commission, in its additional report of 26th June 1873, proposed to do the same by the introduction of a legal tender currency of 10- and 5-florin pieces in gold, and the withdrawal of the silver standard coins issued under the law of 1847. This measure did not meet the approval of the States-General. For the moment Holland had therefore no standard of value, the Mint being closed to silver, and gold being unrecognised. The consequent heavy fall in the exchange led to an agitation which resulted in the enactment of the law of 6th June 1875, which opened the Mint to the public for the coining of golden 10-guilder pieces of .9 fine, to be legal tender concurrently with the silver florins at the ratio of 1 to 15.625 (calculated on a quotation of 60.35 price per oz. of silver). The law was only enacted for a year, and in the following May 1876 an attempt was made to pass a bill for the introduction of an exclusive gold standard, and for the demonetisation of silver. The bill was rejected by the First Chamber, and the law of 1875 renewed for another year, and then (by the law of 9th December 1877) renewed "until otherwise determined upon by law."

The result was the permanence of the limping standard--a gold piece with free minting, side by side with silver pieces whose minting is restricted, but gold and silver pieces being alike of unlimited legal tender.

On the 28th March 1877 the States-General passed a law establishing, in the Dutch East Indies, the double standard on the same basis as in Holland, i.e. with the formal suspension of the further coinage of silver. This law was promulgated in Java on the 7th June 1877.

[Sidenote: PORTUGAL IN 1868]

Portugal.

The first law respecting gold in Portugal is dated 4th August 1688.

By that law the price to be paid in the Lisbon and Oporto Mints for a mark of gold (22 carats) was 96,000 reis (533 fr. 33 cents). This same gold was valued at 102,400 reis (568 fr. 88 cents). For a mark of silver of 11 dinheiros (i.e. 11/12 fine) the value was fixed at 6000 reis (33 fr. 33 cents), producing, when minted, 6300 reis (35 francs). The legal ratio at that date (1688) was 1:16 (for purchase price of the metal), 1:16.25 (for the Mint issue rate).

In 1747 the value of a mark of coined silver was changed, and rose from 35 francs to 41 francs 66 cents (7500 reis), an enactment which changed the ratio at a blow to 13.6.

This ratio remained until the beginning of the present century, and led in short to the expulsion of gold from the monetary circulation.

The law of the 6th March 1822 gave to a mark of coined gold a fixed value of 120 milreis (666 francs 666 cents), and the gold piece, whose value was 6400 reis (35 francs 55 cents), had a value of 41 francs 66 cents (7500 reis). This law was repealed shortly afterwards, together with those passed in the Cortes of 1820, but was restored and ratified by another law of the 24th November 1823, and by a special charter of 5th June 1824.

The preamble of the law of 1822 had declared that the equivalence of 13.5 between gold and silver was very far from expressing the proportion of their mercantile value, and that gold did not practically come into circulation on account of the legal value of such money being below its corresponding value in bullion, the legal ratio was therefore raised to 16 in 1825.

In 1835 a new law, of the 24th April, gave the coined silver mark the value of 7500 reis (41 francs 66 cents), which brought the equivalence to about 15.5, a figure which was considered the average rate of exchange of money, whether national or foreign.

On the 3rd March 1847 a new law was passed raising the value of the gold mark to 128,000 reis (711 francs 11 cents), and the gold piece, whose value had been fixed in 1822 at 41 francs 66 cents (7500 reis), rose to 44 francs 44 cents (8000 reis). After this law other legal measures were taken which established the legal ratio of 16.5.

It was these incessant alterations of ratio which led Portugal to abandon bimetallism. The preamble of the law of 1854, which instituted the gold single standard, expresses this, attesting that the circulation felt the lack of harmony and the disorder produced by alterations in the ratios, that the legal ratio being higher than the commercial ratio hampered the transmission of money and burdened all transactions.

The law was adopted unanimously by the Portuguese Chambers.

The International Conferences.

The chief feature of the modern monetary agitation--the international conferences and the attempt at international system--is due to the rapid development of bimetallic theory in France, and to the initiative of the United States, as well as to the universal or world-embracing needs of the situation, and the extension of the domain of international law or morality.

It is a mistake to suppose that this new era dates from 1871, from the change in the German monetary system and the commencement of the wide divergence between the two metals. The formation of the Latin Union was the initial step in the process, although, in a smaller sphere, German monetary history for centuries had been acquainted with Mint conventions between very divergent systems, and had shortly before furnished another illustration in the Conference of Vienna in 1857. The first widely-embracing international conference proper, however, was the outcome of an expression of opinion in the conclave of the Latin Union. It was called at the invitation of France, and met at Paris on the 17th June 1867. The States represented were Austria, Baden, Bavaria, Belgium, Denmark, Spain, the United States, France, Great Britain, Greece, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal, Prussia, Russia, Sweden and Norway, Switzerland, Turkey, and Würtemberg. The eight sessions of the conference occupied till the 6th July 1867. All the states except Holland declared in favour of a gold standard. It closed without arriving at any actual or practical conclusions, but the president, De Parieu, in his concluding oration, considered himself justified in asserting that the sense of the conference was in favour of a gold monometallic standard, approximating, as near as the occasions of future Mint change in the various states would permit, to a unit based on the 5-franc piece (620 tale to a kilogramme of gold).

[Sidenote: THE CONFERENCE OF 1868]

Though without immediate practical result, the conference initiated a wide movement. In England it was followed by the appointment of a commission, 18th February 1868, "to consider and report upon the proceeding of the said international monetary conference, ... and to examine and report upon the recommendations of the conference, and their adaptability to the circumstances of the United Kingdom, and whether it would be desirable to make any and what changes in the coinage of the United Kingdom, in order to establish, either wholly or partially, such uniformity as the conference had held in contemplation."

The commission sat from the 13th March to the 8th July 1868, but closed without practical decision, in regard of the difficulties lying in the way of an international coinage. In particular, the proposition of a reduction of the pound sterling to the 25-franc piece was rejected.

In France the whole course of public opinion, both before and after the conference of 1876, and in the concluding examination of the _Enquête_ of 1865-69, ran strongly in favour of gold monometallism, and the opinion has been unflinchingly held and expressed that only the breaking out of the Franco-German War prevented the adoption of that system in France and in the states of the Latin Union. It is hardly too much to say that the conclusion of the war, with the heavy war indemnity which she thereby suffered, took the initiative in monetary legislation out of the hands of France.

Along with the latest reconstruction of her hoary imperial scheme, Germany effected her great and greatly-needed monetary unification and reform. She accomplished it on the basis of the old or French ratio of 15:5, and for two years after the reception of the scheme the price of silver maintained itself moderately. On the 9th July 1873, however, she completed the system by the Legal Tender Law, which demonetised the silver currency, and gradually more than two-thirds of the total old German silver money was called in, melted into bullion, and flung on the market. Concurrently, other changes were at work on the Continent. In 1872 the Scandinavian States followed the example of Germany and adopted a gold in place of a former silver standard. By the treaty of 18th December 1872 a common system was established between Sweden, Norway, and Denmark. For Sweden the conversion of the silver currency was based on a ratio of 15.57, for Denmark 15.43, and for Norway 15.44. Three years later the Netherlands followed suit. By their law of 6th June 1875 and 10th May 1876 they adopted a gold in place of their previous silver standard at a basis ratio of 15.625.

Before the completion of these widespread changes, the great fall in the gold price of silver had begun, and the United States in her silver-producing interests, Great Britain in the interests of her Indian dependency and in those of her trade with silver-using countries, and the whole commercial world generally in the dislocation of international exchange, found themselves menaced by gravest danger.

[Sidenote: THE DEPRECIATION OF SILVER]

Before the inrush of silver to the Mint, caused by such a fall, the Latin Union first limited and then abandoned its coining of the 5-franc piece.

The fall of silver became thereby only the more acute and confirmed. By July 1876 it had sunk to 46-3/4 per oz. Apprehension was universally felt, and in both England and the United States fresh commissions were appointed to consider the question. The English commission on the depreciation of silver was appointed in March 1876, and sat from the 20th March to the 8th May, under the presidency of Mr. Goschen. The investigation turned upon the causes of the prevailing situation, without any attempt at the suggestion of a remedial positive system.

Later, in the same year (15th August), the American Congress voted the appointment of a like commission, to inquire into the causes of the depreciation of silver and into the feasibility of a reconstruction of a bimetallic system, as well as to devise a ratio and measures for the facilitation of a return to cash payments in the United States. This commission resulted in a double report, the 'majority' and the 'minority' report. The majority, comprising Messrs. Jones, Bogy, Willard, Groesbeck, and Bland, recommended the remonetisation of silver and the recourse to a fresh international conference. This latter proposition was expressed in the compromise known as the Bland Bill, the "Act to authorise the coinage of the standard silver dollar, and to restore its legal tender character, 28th February 1878." Section 2 of this law imposed it upon the President of the United States to invite the members of the Latin Union and the other interested nations to an international conference. On the invitation of France this conference met in Paris on 10th August 1878. The American delegates proposed the free coinage of silver in an international agreement and its unrestricted employ on a full equality of tender with gold. The delegates of Belgium, Switzerland, and Norway combated the proposals, and, on the part of England, Mr. Goschen declared that while the complete demonetisation of silver portended a commercial crisis to which no parallel could be found, England could consent to no serious modification of her currency system. Germany was not represented, and in her absence France adopted a waiting policy, and the conference closed with an impotent expression of opinion that, in view of the difference of opinion, it was useless to discuss an international ratio, and that, while it was necessary for the world to maintain the currency of silver, the choice and treatment of each or either metal must be left to the particular monetary situation and needs of each separate state.

It was not to be expected that so lame a conclusion could stand before the needs of the situation. On the 19th May 1879 the landed interest in Germany succeeded in driving the Chancellor of the Empire to suspend the further sale of silver. The circumstance gave fresh hope to the bimetallists, and a busy propaganda was carried on throughout Europe and the States. The renewed international conference of 1881 is to be regarded as an outcome of this movement.

[Sidenote: THE CONFERENCE OF 1881]

On the invitation of the United States and France the third international conference met in Paris on the 19th April 1881. All the European States, Canada, India, and the United States were represented.

France, through her delegates, Magnin, the president of the conference, and Henri Cernuschi, at once and boldly declared for bimetallism. The United States, Italy, Austria, the Netherlands, and British India followed suit. On behalf of their states the British and German delegates declared that no change in the currency systems of their countries could be entertained, but in case of an agreement among the chief nations certain regulations to increase the monetary employment of silver might be devised. Belgium, Switzerland, Greece, and the Scandinavian kingdoms declared against bimetallism. After a recess from the 30th June to the 19th May the conference closed on the 8th July 1881 with a nominal adjournment to the 12th April 1882, so as to give room for possible currency legislation in the meantime. On the day fixed, however, the conference, as need hardly be said, did not reassemble.

Practically, in the interval between the second and third of these international delegations, the monetary situation had not perceptibly altered. The price of silver in 1878 had been 52-9/16, in 1881 it was 51-11/16: the general level of prices had, if anything, slightly improved, while the production of silver had not materially increased (from 2,551,000 kilogrammes in 1878 to 2,593,000 kilogrammes in 1881), though that of gold had certainly decreased. The close of the conference was, however, followed by a strong bimetallic agitation in England and Germany, which found united expression in the Bimetallic Congress at Cologne in October 1882.

This congress unanimously adopted the following resolutions:--

"That in order to the establishment of a firm ratio between gold and silver, it is desirable for England and Germany--

"1. To increase the employment of silver by minting full tender silver by the side of the divisional restricted tender silver.

"2. That Germany should withdraw all gold and paper below the value of 10 marks [and replace it by silver].

"3. That Germany should sell no more silver.

"4. That the Bank of England should put in practice the clause of her charter which allowed her to employ silver as part of the bank reserve."

The conclusions of this congress had, however, no practical influence on the course of policy of either nation.

In the United States a parallel though more interested agitation was conducted, centring round the yearly proposed repeal of the compulsory minting clauses of the Bland Bill.

[Sidenote: THE ENGLISH GOLD AND SILVER COMMISSION]

In England the commercial depression, consequent upon falling prices and the dislocation of exchanges with India and the East, ran its full course, and gave fresh ground for activity to the then recently formed Bimetallic League.

In the course of 1886 silver had sunk to 42d. per oz., and when the royal commission on the depression of trade and industry closed its investigations, with the expression of a desire for an inquiry into the state of the precious metals, the British Government only too gladly acceded. On the 20th September 1886 the royal commission "to inquire into the present changes in the relative values of the precious metals" was appointed. Its final report was made in October 1888, and, as is well remembered, was of a divided nature. All the members of the commission agreed that the action of the Latin Union in 1873 broke the link between gold and silver, which had kept the price of silver, as measured by gold, constant at about the legal ratio, and thereby left silver exposed to the influence of all the factors which go to determine the price of a commodity. On the question of bimetallism, in reference to the actual and to any possible currency system, the commissioners disagreed, and made separate reports. Lord Herschell, Sir C.W. Fremantle, Sir John Lubbock, Sir Thomas Henry Farrer, J.W. Birch, and Leonard H. Courtney expressed themselves adversely.

"Though unable to recommend the adoption of what is commonly known as bimetallism, we desire it to be understood that we are quite alive to the imperfections of standards of value, which not only fluctuate but fluctuate independently of each other, and we do not shut our eyes to the possibility of future arrangements between nations which may reduce these fluctuations. One uniform standard of value for all commercial nations would, no doubt, be a great advantage. But we think that any premature and doubtful step might, in addition to its other dangers and inconveniences, prejudice and retard progress to this end.

"We think also that many of the evils and dangers which arise from the present condition of the currencies of different nations have been exaggerated, and that some of the expectations of benefit to be derived from the changes which have been proposed would, if such changes were adopted, be doomed to disappointment.

"Under these circumstances we have felt that the wiser course is to abstain from recommending any fundamental change in the system of currency under which the commerce of Great Britain has attained its present development."

From these opinions dissent was directly expressed in Part III. of the report by the remaining members--Sir Louis Malet, A.J. Balfour, Henry Chaplin, Sir D. Barbour, Sir W.H. Houldsworth, and Sir Samuel Montague.

[Sidenote: DISSENT FROM REPORT OF COMMISSION]

"We cannot doubt that if the system which prevailed before 1873 were replaced in its integrity most of the evils which we have above described would be removed; and the remedy which we have to suggest is simply the reversion to a system which existed before the changes above referred to were brought about--a system, namely, under which both metals were freely coined into legal tender money at a fixed ratio over a sufficiently large area.

"The remedy which we suggest is essentially international in its character, and its details must be settled in concert with the other powers concerned.

"It will be sufficient for us to indicate the essential features of the agreement to be arrived at, viz.:--

"1. Free coinage of both metals into legal tender money.

"2. The fixing of a ratio at which the coins of either metal shall be available for the payment of all debts at the option of the debtor.

"We submit, therefore, that the chief commercial nations of the world, such as the United States, Germany, and the states forming the Latin Union, should, in the first place, be consulted as to their readiness to join with the United Kingdom in a conference, at which India and any of the British colonies which may desire to attend shall be represented, with a view to arrive, if possible, at a common agreement on the basis above indicated."

Such a report was claimed as a victory for either side, but its doubtful tenor only confirmed the rooted suspicion of the English administration as regards any change of the currency system. And when, on the occasion of the Paris Exhibition in 1889, a free International Monetary Congress was held, as one of the numerous special congresses connected with the celebration, Great Britain was not represented among the 194 members who attended on the invitation of the organising committee. M. Magnin, governor of the Bank of France, presided at the sittings, which covered from the 11th to the 15th September. Like its predecessor, the international conference, this congress closed without direct or practical resolution. Putting out of view this congress as of a more informal nature, a period of eleven years elapsed between the still only prorogued conference of Paris of 1881 and the conference of Brussels in 1893. This--as yet the last--conference was summoned on the initiative of the United States, but from the commencement a distinct difference of tone and method made itself felt; the Government of the United States recognising that some European countries might not be willing to adopt the remedy which they would prefer, namely, "the establishment of some fixity of value between gold and silver, and the free use of silver as a coin metal, upon a ratio to gold to be fixed by an agreement between the great commercial peoples of the world." The invitation to and purpose of the conference were conveyed in quite general terms, namely thus, "For the purpose of considering what measures, if any, could be taken to increase the use of silver in the currency systems of nations."

[Sidenote: THE BRUSSELS CONFERENCE]

The invitation was accepted by all the most important states, and at the first meeting, on 26th November 1892, the delegates of twenty Governments were present, namely, Austria, Hungary, Belgium, Denmark, France, Germany, Great Britain, British India, Greece, Italy, Mexico, The Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Roumania, Russia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey, and the United States.

The proceedings were opened by M. Beernaert, President of the Council and Finance Minister of Belgium. M. Montefiore Levi, senator, and delegate of Belgium, was chosen as president, and his Excellency, M. Edwin H. Terrell, Minister of the United States at Brussels, and one of the delegates of the United States, was chosen vice-president.

At the second meeting the American delegates submitted a scheme for international bimetallism, but, in conformity with the terms of the invitation, at the same time expressed a hope that the powers represented would consider and submit other plans for the enlarged use of silver. Two such proposals they themselves suggested for discussion--(1) the plan of M. Moritz Levy, proposed at the conference of 1881, and (2) the plan proposed by the late Dr. A. Soetbeer. The main design of both these proposals was to increase the use of silver, by substituting silver coins or notes based on silver, for such small gold coins and small notes based on gold as are at present in circulation.

At the same session the delegates of Germany, Austria, and Russia explained that they were instructed not to express an opinion or to vote upon any resolution. Roumania, Portugal, Turkey, and Greece not having special instructions, felt themselves compelled to take up a similar attitude. Finding that France and the States of the Latin Union were apparently more disposed to criticism of, rather than to cordial co-operation with, the objects of the conference, the delegates of the United States did not press for a resolution on the wider question of bimetallism, and the attention of the conference was accordingly fixed on the subsidiary suggestions. To these latter, as above, was added on the same day a third, made by Mr. Alfred de Rothschild, to the effect that on condition of the United States continuing her purchases of 54 million oz. of silver yearly the different European powers should combine to make certain yearly purchases, say to the extent of £5,000,000 yearly; these purchases to be continued over a period of five years, at a price not exceeding 43 pence per oz. On a rise of silver above that price the purchases for the time being to be immediately suspended.

In committee this latter proposal was thus modified--

1. The European states which agree, upon the basis of this proposal, will buy in each year 30 million oz. of silver, on condition that the United States agree to continue their present purchases, and that unlimited free coinage be maintained in British India and Mexico.

2. The proportion of the purchases to be made by each country will be determined by agreement.

3. The purchases will be made at the discretion of and in the manner preferred by each Government.

4. These amounts of silver will be devoted in each country to the monetary uses authorised by the legislation of that state, and the silver will be either coined or made the guarantee for an issue of ordinary or special notes, as Government may think fit.

5. The arrangement will be made for five years. The obligatory purchase of silver will be suspended should the metal reach in the London market a price determined by agreement between the Governments. The purchases may be renewed, if the delegates of the different countries interested should agree upon the fixing of a new limit of price. They should be renewed in any case if the price falls below the original limit.

With regard to the Soetbeer plan it was abandoned in committee, while the Levy plan was drawn up in the following terms:--

"1. The withdrawal from circulation within a period of ... of gold coins containing a weight of less than 5.806 grms. of fine gold (20-franc pieces).

"2. The withdrawal of notes of a less value than the coin of 20 francs or its equivalent, an exception being made of notes representing a deposit of silver."

The manner of adopting and recommending these schemes to the conference from the committee was peculiar. The British delegate, Sir C. Fremantle, declared that he could not entertain the "Levy" except in conjunction with the "Rothschild" scheme, and while recommending the latter to the conference for discussion, the states of the Latin Union declared that even if passed, they could not recommend the plan to their Governments.

At the fourth session M. Boissevain declared that there were insurmountable obstacles to its adoption by the Government of the Netherlands. General Strachey said that unless it received more favour than was indicated by the report, he would be unable to support it. Mr. Allard, one of the Belgian delegates, declared that it was insufficient, and Sir Rivers Wilson declared, on behalf of himself and Sir Charles Fremantle, that recognising that this want of support would prevent them from recommending the plan to their Government, they would refrain from taking part in a detailed discussion of it, although they did not consider it inconsistent with the monometallist opinions which they held. Mr. M'Creary (delegate for the United States), then stated that he did not consider M. de Rothschild's proposal, as it stood, equitable to the United States, and therefore that he would be unable to support it.

[Sidenote: CLOSE OF THE BRUSSELS CONFERENCE]

In view of the various declarations, M. de Rothschild withdrew his plan, and there was left before the conference only the Levy plan. This latter was favourably regarded, but was radically insufficient for the situation, and not considered important enough to receive really vigorous support.

The course of the conference thereupon returned to the general discussion of the bimetallic proposal of the United States. In this discussion the attitude of reserve which the French delegates had maintained was abandoned, and M. Tirard declared with the greatest clearness that he could not advise his Government to open the French Mints to the free coinage of silver, unless there was a general agreement on the part of other nations to open their Mints also. Until, therefore, there should be a decided change of opinion on the part of Great Britain, Germany, Austria, the Scandinavian States, and other monometallic states, the question of returning to the free coinage of silver must be looked upon as settled.

In view of such declarations the delegates of the United States declared that they would not press for a vote upon the question of bimetallism. And the conference closed with a formal adjournment, should the Governments approve, to the 30th May 1893.

The close of the conference was a heavy blow to the bimetallic cause, as illustrating so fully the impossibility of any arrangement. Germany, Denmark, Sweden, and Norway, declared clearly that no change would be made on the gold basis of their currency. The delegate of Austria Hungary was equally explicit in his statement that his Government had every intention of abiding by the gold standard they were in the course of adopting.

The decided lead of France was followed punctually by Switzerland, Italy, Belgium, and Greece. The Netherlands were prepared to join a bimetallic union, provided that Great Britain formed a part of it; and Spain and Mexico were willing to adopt bimetallism, or other measures which would have the effect of raising the price of silver. No declaration was made on the behalf of Russia, though one of the delegates, speaking personally, was an active supporter of the gold standard. The Roumanian Government did not consider bimetallism a practical possibility, and Turkey and Portugal expressed no opinion.

Practically, the United States stood alone in advocacy of bimetallism. In addition to this fact, the situation was rendered much more trying for her delegates by the fact that since their appointment the presidential election had placed the Democratic party in power, and great uncertainty prevailed as to the attitude and intentions of a new President and Congress. "In these circumstances it soon became evident that the delegates were anxious for an adjournment of the question to give the new Government the opportunity of expressing their views, and that the conference would adjourn without any practical result. But, nevertheless, some very important statements and declarations were elicited in the course of the debates. In the first place, in addition to the distinct declarations on the part of some of the most important European powers that they would not entertain bimetallism, the representatives of the United States announced in very clear language that at any moment their Government might be disinclined to continue their purchases of silver, and that they were determined to protect their stock of gold. The Indian delegates alluded to the possibility of their Government finding itself under the necessity of closing its Mint to the free coinage of silver."

[Sidenote: GOLD STANDARD FOR INDIA]

Already, before the calling of the Brussels Conference, it had been recognised that, in case of failure to arrive at a bimetallic agreement, it would be essential thus far to close the Indian Mint, and to attempt the establishment of a gold standard in India. This impression, together with a draft scheme for a gold currency, was conveyed in a minute of Sir David Barbour's, addressed to the Secretary of State, 21st June 1892. As the result of correspondence between the Secretary of State for India in Council and the Government of India the British Government, on the 21st October 1892, i.e. a month before the meeting of the Brussels Conference, nominated a committee to consider the proposals submitted by the Indian Government for stopping the free coinage of silver in India, with a view to the introduction of a gold standard.

The committee consisted of--The Lord High Chancellor; The Right Hon. Leonard H. Courtney, M.P.; Sir Thomas Henry Farrer, Bart.; Sir Reginald Earle Welby, G.C.B.; Arthur Godley, Esq., C.B.; Lieutenant-General Richard Strachey, C.S.I.; Bertram Wodehouse Currie, Esq.

A hope was at first expressed that the committee would be able to make its report before the meeting of the conference at Brussels. But it was not actually made until the 31st May 1893.

India.

The part which India has played in the currency history of the world has been characteristic and uniform from the first. India is, and has been, from the birth of international commerce, the receptacle or sink for the precious metals of the civilised Western world. The fact that in so being she has constituted herself the safety-valve of the world's currencies is not confined to the present day merely. It is peculiarly applicable to the present day, with our organisation of banking and credit, which has concentrated the metallic reserves in certain burning central spots, and built thereon a superstructure of credit transactions so vast and in so delicately poised a manner that any undue addition to the metallic reserve sends a shudder of excitement and speculation through the whole, inducing over-trading and over-funding, and in the end a crisis. Such is the structure of the world's commerce that India provides an outlet or drain for any sudden crisis-bringing inflow of precious metal, and preserves the equilibrium of our system. The fact is patent to-day, because the nature of our credit and banking system is understood. But in reality this function India has performed through ages.

The influence she now exerts through impact with a highly delicate credit system, she formerly exerted on a less uniform and delicate system by the rougher influence of prices generally. The gain attending the Eastern trade in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries was not measured by modern conceptions of dividends or trading margins. To the European trader the intercourse was attended with a double gain, commercial and financial--the latter really bimetallic in nature from the higher ratio then prevailing between silver and gold in India.

To India it meant a perpetual balance of trade in her favour, if such a phrase can be used of such a situation,--a continual inflow of precious metal. Her capacity of absorption of metal seems as large and unsatisfied as ever, and, on the assumption of an unaltered situation in Europe and America, her function in the world's currency system still remains--feasible and beneficent. It is the most difficult question attending the modern currency crisis, whether such assumption of an unaltered situation is permissible.

Further than this, as a simple matter of fact, the currency difficulty with India at the present moment is purely governmental and commercial. The Indian Government has yearly to remit a very large sum to this country in discharge of its gold obligations. In 1873-74, before the great fall in silver commenced, the amount remitted was £13,285,678, which, at the rate of exchange of 1 rupee = 1s. 10.35d., meant 142,657,000 rupees. During the year 1892-3 the amount remitted was £16,532,215, which, at the average rate of exchange in that year, 1s. 2.985d., required a payment of 264,784,150 rupees. If this could have been remitted at the exchange of 1873-74, it would only have needed 177,519,200 rupees, making a difference of 87,274,950 rupees. The result of this is to turn what would be a surplus of revenue into a large deficit. At an estimated exchange of 1s. 4d. per rupee for the past year, a surplus of revenue over expenditure was shown of 1,466,000 rupees. The exchange having fallen to an average of rather less than 1s. 3d., this surplus has been converted into an estimated deficit of 10,819,000 rupees. Notwithstanding the improvement of the revenue by 16,533,000 rupees over the budget estimate, the situation at the close of 1892 was fraught with a double danger to the Indian Government. The fall of silver--which had been such that during the year exchange could scarcely be maintained at 1s. 2-5/8d. for the rupee by the refusal to sell bills in India below that rate--might still proceed. And, secondly, in case of failure attending the Brussels Conference, the United States would be inevitably driven to abandon her single-handed attempt to keep up the price of silver by her silver purchases. In that case an unexampled fall of silver might be expected. The only practical solution of the difficulty was the adoption of a gold standard for India, and in order to do so at a workable rate for the rupee it would be necessary to anticipate such further fall.

So much, in very brief, for the Government situation. For the commercial,--the harassment of trade by fluctuations of exchange, the check to investments, the handicapping of the Lancashire manufactures, and so on,--all this ground is still strewn with the débris of debate and difference. As far as the currency question, pure and simple, is concerned--such, that is, as is conceived of throughout this book, viz. metallic--it is almost incapable of presentation or realisation. Through the extraordinary preference of the Indian for the precious metals as metals or as a commodity, quite apart from currency use, the ordinary action of such monetary laws as have been at work in Europe for centuries is nullified--to how great an extent it is quite impossible to estimate. The minting of silver has been such as might be expected under the conditions of free minting of a cheapening metal--i.e. it has risen on an average to the full amount of the net imports of silver. But, conversely, there has been no such reactionary influence of such mintings on the gold store of the country as would have taken place in Europe. The importations of silver have gone hand in hand with a net importation, not exportation, of gold, with no traceable evidence of bimetallic action.

The establishment of the gold standard for India is, therefore, primarily and in greatest part a governmental measure. As far as relates to such purely scientific phenomena and considerations, as have governed the European currencies for centuries, India still presents field for little or for very questionable observation.[22]

TABLE OF THE SURPLUS OR NET IMPORTS OF THE PRECIOUS METALS INTO INDIA

+---------+-----------+---------------+----------------+ | Year. | Gold. | Silver. | Council Bills. | +---------+-----------+---------------+----------------+ | 1835-6 | £329,918 | £1,611,896 | £2,045,254 | | 1836-7 | 419,724 | 1,338,882 | 2,042,232 | | 1837-8 | 430,870 | 1,966,944 | 1,706,184 | | 1838-9 | 258,925 | 2,645,130 | 2,346,592 | | 1839-40 | 226,643 | 1,650,471 | 1,439,525 | | 1840-1 | 137,312 | 1,401,670 | 1,174,450 | | 1841-2 | 165,623 | 1,283,228 | 2,589,283 | | 1842-3 | 211,161 | 2,952,445 | 1,197,438 | | 1843-4 | 406,523 | 3,695,442 | 2,801,731 | | 1844-5 | 710,100 | 1,988,561 | 2,516,951 | | 1845-6 | 544,476 | 932,490 | 3,065,709 | | 1846-7 | 846,949 | 1,378,249 | 3,097,042 | | 1847-8 | 1,039,116 | (_-491,191_) | 1,541,804 | | 1848-9 | 1,348,918 | 313,904 | 1,889,195 | | 1849-50 | 1,116,993 | 1,273,607 | 2,935,118 | | 1850-1 | 1,153,294 | 2,117,225 | 3,236,458 | | 1851-2 | 1,267,613 | 2,865,357 | 2,777,523 | | 1852-3 | 1,172,301 | 4,605,024 | 3,317,122 | | 1853-4 | 1,061,443 | 2,305,744 | 3,850,565 | | 1854-5 | 731,290 | 29,600 | 3,669,678 | | 1855-6 | 2,506,245 | 8,194,375 | 1,484,040 | | 1856-7 | 2,091,214 | 11,073,247 | 2,819,711 | | 1857-8 | 2,783,073 | 12,218,948 | 628,499 | | 1858-9 | 4,426,453 | 7,728,342 | 25,901 | | 1859-60 | 4,284,234 | 11,147,563 | 4,694 | | 1860-1 | 4,232,569 | 5,328,009 | 797 | | 1861-2 | 5,184,425 | 9,086,456 | 1,193,729 | | 1862-3 | 6,848,159 | 12,550,155 | 6,641,576 | | 1863-4 | 8,898,306 | 12,796,719 | 8,979,521 | | 1864-5 | 9,839,964 | 10,078,798 | 6,789,473 | | 1865-6 | 5,724,476 | 18,668,673 | 6,998,899 | | 1866-7 | 3,842,328 | 6,963,074 | 5,613,746 | | 1867-8 | 4,609,467 | 5,593,961 | 4,137,285 | | 1868-9 | 5,159,352 | 8,601,022 | 3,705,741 | | 1869-70 | 5,592,117 | 7,320,337 | 6,980,122 | | 1870-1 | 2,282,121 | 941,937 | 8,443,509 | | 1871-2 | 3,565,344 | 6,512,827 | 10,310,339 | | 1872-3 | 2,543,362 | 704,644 | 13,939,095 | | 1873-4 | 1,382,638 | 2,451,383 | 13,285,678 | | 1874-5 | 1,873,535 | 4,642,202 | 10,841,615 | +---------+-----------+---------------+----------------+

_NET_ IMPORT OF SILVER AND MINTING OF _NEW_ SILVER, 1870-92

+-----------+---------------+---------------+ | | Net | New | | Year. | Imports | Coinage | | | (Rupees). | (Rupees). | +-----------+---------------+---------------+ | 1870-1 | 9,419,240 | 17,181,970 | | 1871-2 | 65,203,160 | 16,903,940 | | 1872-3 | 7,151,440 | 39,809,270 | | 1873-4 | 24,958,240 | 23,700,070 | | 1874-5 | 46,422,020 | 48,968,840 | | 1875-6 | 15,553,550 | 25,502,180 | | 1876-7 | 71,988,720 | 62,711,220 | | 1877-8 | 146,763,350 | 161,803,260 | | 1878-9 | 39,706,940 | 72,107,700 | | 1879-80 | 78,697,420 | 102,569,680 | | 1880-1 | 38,925,740 | 42,496,750 | | 1881-2 | 53,790,500 | 21,862,740 | | 1882-3 | 74,802,270 | 65,084,570 | | 1883-4 | 64,051,510 | 36,634,000 | | 1884-5 | 72,456,310 | 57,942,320 | | 1885-6 | 116,066,290 | 102,855,660 | | 1886-7 | 71,557,380 | 46,165,370 | | 1887-8 | 92,287,500 | 107,884,250 | | 1888-9 | 92,466,790 | 73,122,550 | | 1889-90 | 109,378,760 | 85,511,580 | | 1890-1 | 141,751,360 | 131,634,740 | | 1891-2 | 90,221,840 | 55,539,700 | | 1892-3 | 128,635,690 | 127,052,100 | | +---------------+---------------+ | Total of} | | | | 23 years} | 1,652,256,020 | 1,525,044,460 | +-----------+---------------+---------------+

NET IMPORT AND MINTING OF GOLD

+---------+--------------------------+---------+ | Year. | Rupees. | Rupees. | +---------+--------------------------+---------+ | 1875-6 | 15,451,310 | 171,500 | | 1876-7 | 2,073,490 | Nil | | 1877-8 | 4,681,290 | 156,360 | | 1878-9 | (_Export of 8,961,730_) | 850 | | 1879-80 | 17,505,040 | 147,300 | | 1880-1 | 36,551,990 | 133,550 | | 1881-2 | 48,439,840 | 339,700 | | 1882-3 | 49,308,710 | 174,950 | | 1883-4 | 54,625,050 | Nil | | 1884-5 | 46,719,360 | 129,650 | | 1885-6 | 27,629,350 | 225,850 | | 1886-7 | 21,770,650 | Nil | | 1887-8 | 29,924,810 | Nil | | 1888-9 | 28,139,340 | 226,090 | | 1889-90 | 46,153,030 | 230,500 | | 1890-1 | 56,361,720 | Nil | | 1891-2 | 24,137,920 | 248,010 | | 1892-3 | (_Export of 28,126,830_) | ... | +---------+--------------------------+---------+

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 15: The returns for the years 1825-29 give no separate figures for gold and for silver, but give only the total of the two together.]

[Footnote 16: From 1865-1878--

France minted 625,466,380 francs. Belgium " 350,497,720 " Italy " 359,059,820 " Switzerland " 7,978,250 " ------------- 1,343,000,000 " -------------

]

[Footnote 17: As far, that is, as relates to gold. So far as silver is concerned, it was practically abrogated by the clauses for the prohibition of silver coinage in 38 Geo. III. c. 59 (1798), and finally repealed by the Act of 56 Geo. III. c. 68 (1816). See _postea_.]

[Footnote 18: Professor Laughlin brings out very strongly that even in such action Hamilton shows no trace of the modern conception of bimetallism, that his report expresses an emphatic preference for gold over silver, and that his object in adopting bimetallism was, while retaining silver, to leave a door open, if possible, for the introduction of gold.--_History of Bimetallism in the United States_, pp. 13, 14.]

[Footnote 19: By the law of 1837 the alloy for both gold and silver coins was fixed at 1/10. The pure gold in the eagle, which by the Act of 1834 was fixed at 232 grs. (258 grs. gross for the piece), was thereby changed to 232.2 grs. At the same time the pure metal content of the silver dollar was maintained at 371-1/4 grs., the (gross) weight per piece being changed to 412-1/2 grs.]

[Footnote 20: See the case more fully established in Laughlin's _Bimetallism in the United States_, pp. 29, 57.]

[Footnote 21: Viz. of Philadelphia, New Orleans, Dahlonega, Charlotte, San Francisco, and Carson City.]

[Footnote 22: On the subject of the history of the Indian Currency System under the East India Co., in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, see a very interesting communication made in the pages of the _Nineteenth Century_ by Mr. H.D. Macleod (_Nineteenth Century_, November 1894, p. 777). The question of the system established by the Order in Council of January 1841 (authorising officers in charge of public treasuries to freely receive gold coins struck in conformity with the provisions of Act xvii. of 1835, establishing the 15-rupee pieces), which continued till its rescinding in December 1852, is discussed in the evidence of Mr. T. Comber before the Royal Commission on Gold and Silver (_Second Report of the Commission on Changes in the Relative Values of the Precious Metals_, 1888, p. 27). For an excellent and succinct history of the Indian currency system from the end of the 18th century, see Robert Chalmers' _History of Currency and the British Colonies_, p. 336.]

APPENDIX I

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF FLORENCE DURING THE DAYS OF HER COMMERCIAL ACTIVITY AND INDEPENDENCE

Throughout the history of independent Florence her gold coin type is always the florin. In its first beginning her monetary system had relation to that of the restored Empire. The _silver fiorino_ of which the first mention occurs was equivalent to 12 denari, as in the Charlemagne system. Presumably this would be equal to some hypothecated _soldo_, and the multiple of it a hypothecated fiorino d'oro, gold florin (= 20 soldi), would be equal to the lira or libra, or unit of weight. This will explain how it is possible to have mention of gold florins almost a century before the actual issuing of a real coin so named. Such mention occurs in the monetary ordinances and schedules of France as early as 1180. (See Preface, _supra_, p. xiii, also De Saulcy, _Documents_, i. 115. Le Blanc was unable to explain this apparent contradiction of history.)

What the particular Florentine weight unit or lira (libbra) was, however, is uncertain. According to the researches of Neri (in _Argelatus_, i. 157) the scheme of weights was--

Denari. Grani. Silver florin = ... 38 23 26 Lira (or 20 popolini) = 32 11 15 21

When it actually emerges, the gold florin has a weight of 53 (English) grs., or 72 Florentine; which would give a mark of 6912 grs. Its standard was of absolute fineness, 24 carats, a standard which was never departed from through the whole of its history. Very little change, too, was made in the weight, hardly more than 4-1/2 grs. in all (or 6-1/4 per cent.).

It was issued at an equivalence of 20 soldi, which were represented by 20 silver florins, already known.

The variation of this coin with regard to the unit coin of lower denomination will be found in the Table below.

There is a second variation of the gold florin, _apparently_ with regard to itself, which has given rise to much misunderstanding, and requires explanation. As the process of wear and tear and abrasion went on in the coins, with lapse of time the custom grew of subdividing or hypothecating a gold florin of ideally perfect weight and condition as the standard for transactions. This became book or bank money, and the actually circulating medium was rated to it at a certain discount. This ideal florin is known as _fiorini di suggello_ or _sigillo_, florin of the public seal, and there is a series of such denominations. The first apparent adoption of such a method--which also emerges in the currency history of Hamburg and Amsterdam--was in 1321, and the florins of that date are styled "of the first sigello"; the second was in 1324, the third in 1345, and so on. Between the years 1328 and 1462 there was a series of eight, as follows:--

1328 5 per cent. advantage. 1345 3 " " 1347 5 " " 1402 5 " " 1402 1-1/4 " " 1442 4 " " 1461 7 " "

Subsequently, by law of 30th May 1464, this various advantage was transferred from the _fiorini di suggello_ to a new denomination, _fiorini d'oro larghi_, with an advantage of 20 per cent. above the _fiorini di suggello_; and once again, by the law of 14th October 1501, the process was repeated. An advantage of 19 per cent. over the _fiorini d'oro larghi_ was announced in favour of the newest denomination, _fiorini d'oro larghi in oro_. The advantage of these last, therefore, over the _fiorini di suggello_ of 1461 amounted to 39 per cent.

It appears quite clear that this advantage represents a differentiation, not of good bank abstract florins from worn current gold florins, but of the former from the actual current medium of payment, and that this latter was _silver_.

The cause of the advantage was the depreciation of the silver denomination, from the aggregate of which was formed the lira, in which was expressed the value of the gold florin.[23]

For illustration:--

In 1464--

120 fiorini di suggello = 100 fiorini d'oro larghi at 4 lire 8 sol. 4 den. each = 530 lire.

Therefore each fiorino d'oro largo ought to = 5 lire 6 sol., which by the tables of the time it actually did.

Similarly, in 1501--

100 fiorini larghi d'oro in oro = 119 larghi di grossi at 5 lire 11 sol. 4 den. = 660 lire.

Therefore fiorino largo d'oro in oro should = 6 lire 12 sol. which it actually did.

The SILVER MONIES of Florence were based on the silver florin = 1/20 of gold florin (= 38-1/2 grains).

From the time of the Mint Law of 1296, these silver coins are styled _grossi_, and subsequently _soldi_, _grossi_, _Guelfi_, etc. etc.

The alloy gradually sank--

Onza. Denaro.

11 18 11 17 (1280) 11 15 (1314) 11 12

remaining at the last-named figure until the reopening of the Pisan Mint in 1597.

As the gold rose in value by the process already indicated, and the idea of the lira as 20 soldi = 1 gold florin, became inapplicable, the lira came to be looked on as a fractional part of the gold piece or florin. This usage grew up in Florence from the beginning of the twelfth century, and so continued till the days of Cosimo I., who in 1534 coined the first lira, i.e. an actual silver coin.

This imaginary lira of mediæval Florence was itself divided, like the florin, into soldi and denari, similar aliquot parts. Hence the custom of keeping Florentine accounts, (1) _a oro_, or (2) _a moneta di piccioli_, the one in terms of the florin of gold, the other in terms of the imaginary lira.

The confusion to which this led was due to the unstable nature of the imaginary money, which from 1312 continually depreciates in value, as compared with the actual hard florin money. In 1314, as some measure of reform, it was ordained that the florin of gold should not equal more nor less than 29 of the soldi of this lira, and that it should never change from such course--the distinction of _moneta bianca_ and _nera_ being introduced for the purpose. The ceasing of the observation of this regulation in the sixteenth century made way for every kind of confusion.

For the explanation of the text in Part I., pp. 19-23, it need only be added that 20 of these imaginary soldi formed the _lira a fiorino_ spoken of.

TABLE OF THE SILVER COINS STRUCK IN FLORENCE, 1252-1534.

+---------+-----------------+---------------------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------------+------------+ | | | Standard. | Weight | Fine Silver | Tale per | Tale per | Value at | | Year. | Denomination. +----------+----------+ of each | in each | Mark |Mark issued to| which | | | | Silver. | Alloy. | piece. | Piece. | minted. |the Merchant. |Circulated. | +---------+-----------------+----------+----------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------------+------------+ | | | Oz. Gr. | Oz. Gr. | Grains. | Grains. | | |Soldi. Den. | | 1252 |Fiorino d'argento| --- | --- | 43-1/5 | --- | 160 | --- | 1 0 | | | | | | | | | |(of the gold| | | | | | | | | | florin.) | | 1280 | Do. | 11 15 | 0 9 | 45-3/4 | 45-1/4 | 151 | --- | 1 8 | | 1296 |Soldi grossi | 11 15 | 0 9 | 40-9/19 | 39-3/19 | 171 | 167 | 2 0 | | 1305 |Grossi popolini | 11 12 | 0 12 | 40-9/19 | 38-3/4 | 171 | --- | 2 0 | | | |(= Argento popolino.)| | | | | | | 1314 |Guelfi del fiore | 11 12 | 0 12 | 41-5/8 | 39-7/8 | 166 | 163 | 2 6 | | |(Half and quarter| | | | | | | | | | of same.) | | | | | | | | | 1345 |Nuovi Guelfi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 51-7/12 | 49-5/12 | 134 | 132 | 4 0 | |(Aug. 19)| | | | | | | |(of the | | | | | | | | | | piccioli.)| | 1345 |Grossi Guelfi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 52-4/11 | 50-2/11 | 132 | --- | 4 0 | |(Aug. 23)| | | | | | | | | | 1345 |Grossi Guelfi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 48-2/3 | 46-5/8 | 142 | 140 | 4 0 | |(Oct. 23)| | | | | | | | | | 1347 |Guelfi grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 59-1/13 | 56-8/13 | 117 | 111-2/3 | 5 0 | | 1368 |Popolini | 11 12 | 0 12 | 23-1/25 | 22-2/25 | 300 | | 2 0 | | 1390 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 56-8/41 | 53-35/41 | 123 | | 5 6 | | | | | | | | | |(piccioli.) | | 1402 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 52-4/11 | 50-2/11 | 132 | 130 | 5 6 | | 1448 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | | | | | 5 4 | | 1460 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 54 | 51-3/4 | 128 | 125-2/3 | 6 8 | | 1471 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 49-1/47 | 46-38/47 | 141 | 138 | 6 8 | | 1481 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 47-1/49 | 45-3/49 | 147 | 143 | 6 8 | | 1489 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 47-1/49 | 45-3/49 | 147 | 144 | 6 8 | | 1503 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 40-1/2 | 38-19/24 | 170-2/3 | 166-2/3 | 7 0 | | 1503 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 71-72/345 | 68-76/145 | 96-2/3 | 94-1/3 |{10 0 | | | | | | | | | |{(bianchi.) | | | | | | | | | |{13 4 | | | | | | | | | |{(neri.) | | 1504 |Carolino or | 11 12 | 0 12 | 71-73/145 | 68-76/145 | 96-2/3 | 94-1/3 | 10 0 | | | barile | | | | | | | (bianchi.) | | 1506 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 39-165/173| 38-50/173 | 173 | 169 | 7 0 | | 1508 |Grossoni | 11 12 | 0 12 | 39-201/347| 38-62/347 | 173-1/2 | 169 | 7 0 | | 1508 |Grossetti | 11 12 | 0 12 | 28-268/731| 27-135/731 | 243-2/3 | 237-2/3 |{4 0 | | | | | | | | | |{(bianchi.) | | | | | | | | | |{5 0 | | | | | | | | | |{(neri.) | | 1524 |Barili | 11 12 | 0 12 | 68-1/4 | 65-13/32 | 101-1/4 | 99 | 13 4 | | |(The half-barile and the teston (= 3 barili) in proportion.) | | | | | 1531 |Grossi | 11 12 | 0 12 | 38 | 36-5/12 | 181-17/19| --- | 7 0 | | 1531 |Barili | 11 12 | 0 12 | 70 | 67-1/12 | 98-46/35 | --- |{10 0 | | | | | | | | | |{(bianchi.) | | | | | | | | | |{13 4 | | | | | | | | | |{(neri.) | | 1531 |Quinto di Ducato | 11 12 | 0 12 | 152 | 145-2/3 | 45-9/19 | --- | 30 0 | | | | | | | | | |(piccioli.) | +---------+-----------------+----------+----------+-----------+-------------+----------+--------------+------------+

TABLE OF THE GOLD COINS OF FLORENCE, 1252-1534.

(From _Zanetti_, i. 439.)

+------+----------------------------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+ | | | | | Tale | Value | |Year. | Denomination. |Standard.| Weight. | per | at which | | | | | | Mark. |circulated.| +------+----------------------------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+ | | | Karati. | Grains. | |Soldi. Den.| | 1252 | Fiorino d'oro | 24 | 72 | 96 | 20 0 | | 1275 | Do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 30 0 | | 1282 | Do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 32 0 | | 1286 | Do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 36 0 | | 1296 | Do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 40 0 | | 1302 | Do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 51 0 | | 1321 | Fiorino of the first | | | | | | | suggello (5 per cent. | | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | 69 | 100 | ... | | 1324 | Fiorino of the second | | | | | | | surgely | 24 | 70-1/2 | 98-1/4 | 60 0 | | 1328 | Fiorino stretti | 24 | 70-1/2 | 98-1/4 | 66 1 | | 1331 | Do. | 24 | 70-1/2 | 98-1/4 | 60 0 | | 1345 | Fiorini of the third | | | | | | | surgely (5 per cent. | | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | 70-1/2 | 98-1/4 | 62 0 | | 1347 | Do. do. | 24 | 70-1/2 | 98-1/4 | 68 0 | | 1352 | Do. do. | ... | ... | ... | 67 6 | | 1353 | Do. do. | ... | ... | ... | 68 6 | | 1356 | Do. do. | ... | ... | ... | 70 0 | | 1375 | Fiorino nuovo | 24 | 71-3/5 | 96-2/5 | 70 0 | | 1378 | Do. | ... | ... | ... | 68 0 | | 1380 | Fiorino nuovastro | ... | ... | ... | 70 0 | | 1402 | Fiorino nuovo of the fifth | | | | | | | suggello (6-1/4 per cent.| | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | 68 |101-11/117| 73 4 | | 1422 | Fiorino nuovissimo or | | | | | | | largo di Galea | 24 | 71-3/5 | 96-2/5 | 80 0 | | 1442 | Fiorino largo | 24 | 72 | 96 | ... | | | Fiorino of the sixth | | | | | | | suggello (10 per cent. | | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | 72 | 96 | ... | | | Fiorino stretto di Camera | | | | | | | of the seventh suggello | | | | | | | (7 per cent. advantage) | 24 | 69-1/8 | 100 | ... | | 1448 | Fiorino of the eighth | | | | | | | suggello (4 per cent. | | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | ... | ... | 85 0 | | 1460 | Fiorino of the ninth | | | | | | | suggello (7 per cent. | | | | | | | advantage) | 24 | 71-6/7 | 96-1/3 | 86 8 | | 1462 | Fiorino (of Pisan weight) | 24 | 71-6/7 | 96-1/2 | 87 0 | | 1464 | Fiorino largo (20 per | | | | | | | cent. better than the | | | | | | | fiorino di suggello) | 24 | 72 | 96 | 106 0 | | 1471 | Do. do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 108 0 | | 1480 | Do. do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 111 0 | | 1485 | Do. do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 111 4 | | 1501 | Fiorino d'oro largo in oro | | | | 140 0 | | | (19 per cent. advantage | | | | (neri.) | | | on the fiorino largo) | 24 | 72 | 96 | 111 4 | | | | | | | (grossi.) | | 1508 | Do. do. | 24 | 72 | 96 | 142 0 | | | | | | | (neri.) | | 1531}| Ducato d'oro | 24 | 72 | 96 | 150 8 | | 1534}| | | | |(piccioli.)| +------+----------------------------+---------+---------+----------+-----------+

TABLE OF THE BILLON MONEY (MONETA NERA OR EROSA) STRUCK IN FLORENCE, 1300-1534.

+-----------+-------------+---------------------+-----------+--------------+------------+-----------+--------------+ | | | Standard. |Weight of |Fine Silver | Tale per |Tale per | Value | | Year. |Denomination.| |each Piece.|in each Piece.| Mark coined|Mark issued| at which | | | +---------------------+ | | | to the | Circulated. | | | | Silver. | Copper. | | | | Merchant | | +-----------+-------------+----------+----------+-----------+--------------+------------+-----------+--------------+ | | |Oz. Gr. |Oz. Gr. | Grains. | Grains. | | | Denari | | | | | | | | | | | | 1316 |Fiorin da sei| 1 0 | 11 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | 6 | | 1321[E] |Fiorini neri | 1 0 | 11 0 | 12-4/5 | 1-1/15 | 540 | --- | 1 | | 1325 |Piccioli | 1 0 | 11 0 | 12-4/5 | 1-1/15 | 540 | 444 | 1 | | 1332 |Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 26-1/2 | 4-5/12 | 261 | 240 | 4 | | | lanajuoli | | | | | | | | | 1337 |Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 21-45/327 | 3-11/24 | 327 | 301 | 4 | |(July 19) | | | | | | | | | | 1337 | Do. | 2 0 | 10 0 | 21-3/4 | 3-5/8 | 318 | 297 | 4 | |(July 28) | | | | | | | | | | 1366 |Piccioli neri| 1 0 | 11 0 | 8-1/4 | 2/3 | 840 | 660 | 1 | | 1371 | Do. | 0 23-1/2 | 11-1/2 0 | 8 | 5/8 | 864 | 708 | 1 | | | Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 18-5/12 | 3-1/12 | 375 | 370 | 4 | | 1417 |Piccioli neri| 1 0 | 11 0 | 6-78/83 | 7/12 | 996 | --- | 1 | | 1432 | Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 18-5/12 | 3-1/12 | 375 | --- | 4 | | 1462 | Soldini | 6 0 | 6 0 | 15 | 7-1/2 | 460 | 446 | 12 | | 1471 | Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 26-42/87 | 4-5/12 | 261 | 240 | 4 | | | Soldini | 6 0 | 6 0 | 13-2/3 | 6-5/6 | 505 | 483 | 12 | | |Piccioli neri| 1 0 | 11 0 | --- | --- | --- | --- | 1 | | 1472 | Quattrini | 1 12 | 10 12 | 16-1/2 | 2-1/24 | 420 | 366 | 4 | | | Piccioli | 0 6 | 11 18 | 8 | 1/6 | 864 | 252 | 1 | | 1490 | Quattrini | 2 0 | 10 0 | 16 | 2-2/3 | 432 | --- | 4 | | | bianchi[F] | | | | | | | | | | Quattrini | 1 0 | 11 0 | 14-7/8 | 1-1/4 | 465 | --- | 4 | | 1509 | Do. | 1 0 | 11 0 | 16-5/12 | 1-1/3 | 420 | --- | 4 | | 1512 | Crazie | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | +-----------+-------------+----------+----------+-----------+--------------+------------+-----------+--------------+

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 23: For a corroboration of this, see the texts of the laws of 1460 and 1470.

1460. "Veduta una legge del anno 1452, che provide che in qualunque pagamento si avesse a fare, si potisse pagare, e cosi fosse accettato, per ogni fiorino di suggello 4 lire 5 soldi delle monete di grossi d'Ariento, per la quel cosa e seguito che i grossi sono scemati tanto di peso che i fiorini larghi per ragguaglio di quelli, dove solevano essere meglio comuneménte da fiorini 10 in 12 per cent., che i fiorini di suggello sono iti a fiorini 22 per cent--"

1471. "Che i fiorini di suggello in moneta bianca o nera non abbiano pregio firmo nè a grossoni, nè a quattrini ma vagliano quello e quanto sara la sua commune valuta dì per dì e secondo saranno alla camera e all' Arte del Comtis--"]

[Footnote E: Beginning of the distinction of white and dark monies (moneta bianca and la nera).]

[Footnote F: Three of which equal one quattro de'ner.]

APPENDIX II

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF VENICE

The Venetian monetary system of history employed a double basis or unit:--

1. The _lira di piccioli_, the principal system, and the one which endured through the whole life of the Republic, from the tenth century to the introduction of the decimal system in 1806.

2. The _lira di grossi_--an ideal system, i.e. money of accompt only, and of importance for a much less extensive period. It originated in the thirteenth century, and was abandoned by the end of the sixteenth.

The "lira" of the first of these systems is derived from the "libra" of Charlemagne, and, like it, was divided into 20 soldi, each soldo being subdivided into 12 denari.

For long the only coin actually minted was this denaro (_parvus_, _parvulus_, _piccolo_ or _minuto_), a silver coin. The first of these thus issued appertain entirely to the system of the Empire of Charlemagne. They bear the name of Louis the Pious (814-40), and approximate in weight to his pieces. The dismemberment of Charlemagne's Empire is followed by a gap in the Venetian coinage, and the series only recommences in the eleventh century. These latter still appertain to the system of the revived Roman (Germanic) Empire, and bear the names of Henry II. (1002-24), Conrad II. (1027-39), and Henry IV. (1056-1106).

From this latter date onwards the imperial monies cease at Venice, and the series of Ducal monies--the monies of the republic of Venice--begin with the Dogeship of Vitale II. (1156-72). From the same period there is noticeable that deterioration in weight which marks all the systems of mediæval Europe. The denari of Doge Sebastiano Ziani (1172-8) and of the two succeeding Doges are scarcely one-quarter the weight of the Charlemagne denarius.

This depreciation led, in the year 1200, to the issue of a piece of higher denomination, namely, the _grosso_--still a silver coin, but valued at 26 piccioli or denari; and for about seventy years the grosso displaced the picciolo. About 1270, however, the coining of the picciolo recommenced under Doge Lorenzo Tiepolo, but at a slightly reduced value, 28 piccioli being rated to the grosso, instead of 26 as in the year 1200. Up to the great recoinage of 1476 the grosso remains the main coin of reference. Its gradual but incessant depreciation can be traced in the table of silver coins given on p. 318.

Under the eleventh doge, Giovanni Dandolo (1280-89), the coining of gold began in Venice. In 1284, the date of the first issue, the gold ducat or sequin (zecchino) of Venice was valued at 18 grossi, giving a ratio of gold to silver of 10.6. The subsequent changes of the ratio have already been stated (see text, _supra_, p. 40). From 1282, 67 ducats were coined from the Venetian mark. This number was increased in 1491 to 67-1/2, and in 1570 to 68-1/4. The course of the sequin throughout is given in the table on p. 316. It was the monetary trouble which they produced that led to the great recoinage accomplished under Doge Nicolo Tron (1471-73) and his successors, Nicolo Marcello (1473-74) and Pietro Mocenigo (1474-76).

From the date of this recoinage onwards the silver grosso was abolished _as a coin_, and a new silver coin, the lira, valued at 20 soldi, was instituted. This is the first appearance of a real and effective lira as a coin. Hitherto the name had only been that of a weight. By the decree of 1472, 36 of these lira were to be coined out of the mark of silver.

On account of the name of the doge this coin was known as the _Lira Tron_ for centuries. In its turn it underwent a ceaseless depreciation (see table on p. 318).

In the middle of the sixteenth century there was so much silver in the Venetian Mint waiting to be coined for the merchants that the State, finding it could only issue 35,000 pieces a month, which, in small pieces of 442 soldi, would take a year to exhaust the stock, determined for the ease and encouragement of the merchants to issue a large silver piece, the _ducato d'argento_, 7-1/4 to the mark of silver by tale, and rated at 124 soldi.

Under Doge Nicoló da Ponte (1578-85) this piece becomes the _scudo d'argento_, which begins in 1578 with an equivalence of 7 lira.

In 1578 the scudo was rated at 7 lira 0 soldi. " 1608 " " 8 " 8 " " 1621 " " 8 " 10 " " 1630 " " 9 " 0 " " 1635 " " 9 " 6 " " 1665 " " 9 " 12 " " 1702 " " 10 " 0 " " 1703 " " 10 " 10 " " 1704 " " 11 " 0 " " 1705 " " 11 " 4 " " 1706 " " 11 " 8 " " 1708 " " 11 " 10 " " 1709 " " 11 " 12 " " 1718 " " 11 " 14 " " 1739 " " 12 " 8 "

On this basis the monetary system of Venice continued till the seizing of the Mint by the Democrats in 1797.

For several years, during which they held possession, they issued a coin called _Tollero_, of the nominal value of 10 Venetian lire, i.e. 5.16 Italian lire, but really only equal to 4.99 of the latter.

In 1802 the Italian Republic was erected by Buonaparte. The monetary law of the Republic, dated 30th April 1804, provided for the coining of a national money on a unit or basis of the silver lira, of the weight established by the law of 27th October 1803, namely, 4 deniers, and of .9 standard.

The unit gold coin to be 1/125 of the new established livre in weight (= 8 deniers), and of .9 standard, to equal 31 lire.

In 1805 Napoleon declared himself King of Italy, but the change was not followed by any radical revolution of the coinage system.

From 1806 the decimal system was introduced into Italy, and on the reduction of the numerous independent monetary systems the Venetian lira was computed at .5116 of the Italian, i.e. 51.16 centesimi.

As a matter of fact, however, the Venetian lira did not totally thereupon disappear from use.

By decree of December 21, 1807, the ducat (zecchino) of 67-47/41 Venetian grs. was rated at 12.03 lire Italiane.

Under the Lombardo-Venetian kingdom, which succeeded, the main Italian monies were assimilated to those of Austria. The money of account was, at Milan, the Austrian lira (= 100 centesimi = 20 Austrian soldi at 5 centesimi each).

There remains to be described the second and less important basis of the Venetian system, that of the lira di grossi. It was throughout--i.e. from the thirteenth century, when it originated, to the close of the sixteenth, when it disappeared--an ideal system, i.e. of account only.

A supposititious lira di grossi was taken and divided into 40 soldi, each soldo was subdivided into 12 denari, and each one of these denari was equivalent to the grosso, the actual coin existing in the system--already described.

The lira di grossi therefore maintained at first the same relativity to the lira di piccioli that the actual grosso did to the actual picciolo, namely, 26:1. This relation, however changed subsequently with the depreciation of the actual grosso (the lira).

In 1278 the ratio of the two was 28:1 " 1282 " " 32:1 " 1343 " " 48:1 " 1472, onwards to the discontinuance of the system 62:1

A curious feature about this system was that in its turn it subdivides. In 1343 a double (hypothetical) grosso was adopted; one of 48 piccioli, the other of 32, both of them subdivided into thirty-two parts as, again, an ideal system.

In 1472, therefore, the Venetian silver system consisted of--

1. _Lira di piccioli_, an actual coin represented by the Troni, and containing 128 grs. of silver, .9472 fine.

2. The ideal _lira di grossi_, then equivalent to 10 ducats, divided into 20 ideal soldi, each equivalent to 1/2-ducat, each soldo again subdivided in 12 grossi, the grosso being now no longer the actual coin of that name but ideal, like the above multiples; and each grosso in its turn subdivided into 32 parts, to which the name of _piccioli_ was given, though as ideal as its multiple the grosso. For distinction's sake probably, these ideal grossi and piccioli occur in history as _grossi a oro_ and _piccioli a oro_.

TABLE OF THE GOLD DUCAT OR SEQUIN OF VENICE.

(According to Nicolo Papadopoli, _Sul Valore Delia Moneta Veneziana_, p. 33.)

+------+----------------------+----------------------+---------------------+ | | | Declared or Deduced | Value in Modern | | Date.| Coin. | Value in Venetian | Italian Lire of the | | | | Lira of History. | Venetian Lira | | | | | of History. | +------+----------------------+----------------------+---------------------+ | | | Lire. Soldi. | Lire. Centesimi. | | 1284 | Ducat = 18 grossi of | | | | | 32 piccioli | | | | | each | 2 8 | 5 012 | | 1324 | " = 24 grossi. | 3 2 | 3 883 | | 1350 | " = 96 soldi. | 4 16 | 2 506 | | 1399 | " = 93 " | 4 13 | 2 587 | | 1417 | " = 100 " | 5 0 | 2 406 | | 1429 | ... | 4 4 | 2 313 | | 1443 | ... | 5 14 | 2 110 | | 1472 | ... | 6 4 | 1 940 | | 1517 | ... | 6 10 | 1 850 | | 1520 | ... | 6 16 | 1 769 | | 1529 | ... | 7 10 | 1 604 | | 1562 | ... | 8 0 | 1 504 | | 1573 | ... | 8 12 | 1 398 | | 1594 | ... | 10 0 | 1 203 | | 1608 | ... | 10 15 | 1 119 | | 1638 | ... | 15 0 | 0 802 | | 1643 | ... | 16 0 | 0 752 | | 1687 | ... | 17 0 | 0 707 | | 1739 | ... | 22 0 | 0 546 | +------+----------------------+----------------------+---------------------+

TABLE OF THE GOLD DUCAT OR SEQUIN OF VENICE.

(According To Vincenzo Padovan, _La Nummografia Venziana Documentato_, pp. 135, 365.)

+-----------------+--------------++-----------------+-------------+ | | Value of || | Value of | | Date. | Ducat in || Date. | Ducat in | |-----------------+--------------++-----------------+-------------+ | |Lire. Soldi. || |Lire. Soldi.| |1284 | 3 0 ||1594 (October 12)| 10 0 | |1287 | 3 2 ||1601 | 10 12 | |1310 | 3 4 ||1605 | 10 14 | |1320 | 3 6 ||1608 | 10 15 | |1360 | 3 10 ||1633 | 14 0 | |1370 | 3 12 || | 14 10 | |1377 | 3 13 ||1638, November 20| 15 0 | |1378 | 3 14 ||1643 | 16 0 | |1379 | 3 16 ||1687 | 17 0 | |1380 | 3 18 ||1697 | 17 10 | |1382 | 4 0 ||1698 | 17 15 | |1384 | 4 4 ||1699 | 18 0 | |1399, October 7 | 4 13 ||1701 | 18 10 | |1401 | 4 18 || | 18 15 | |1417, November 11| 5 0 ||1702 | 19 0 | |1421 | 5 3 || | 19 5 | |1429, July 29 | 5 4 || | 19 10 | |1433 | 5 10 || | 20 0 | |1443, January 23 | 5 14 ||1704 | 20 5 | |1472, March 29 | 6 4 ||1707 | 20 8 | |1517, October 16 | 6 10 ||1708 | 20 10 | |1518 | 6 14 || | 20 15 | |1520 | 6 16 ||1711 | 21 5 | |1524 | 7 4 || | 21 10 | |1529 | 7 10 ||1713 | 21 15 | |1533 | 7 18 ||1716 | 21 18 | |1562 | 8 0 ||Thenceforward to | | |1573 | 8 12 ||the fall of the | | | | 8 16 ||Republic | 22 0 | |1584 | 9 0 || | | | | 9 12 || | | +-----------------+--------------++-----------------+-------------+

TABLE OF THE SILVER COINAGE OF VENICE.

(From Papadopoli, _ubi supra_, with additions.)

+----+-------------------------+------------+-----------+------+--------------+ | | | Value in | | | Value of the | | | | Lire of | Weight of | |Venetian Lira | |Year| Coin. | Venice |the Lira in|Stand-|in Lira of the| | | |declared or | Venetian | ard. |Modern Italian| | | |calculated. | Grains. | |Decimal System| |----+-------------------------+------------+-----------+------+--------------| | | |Lire. Soldi.| | | | |1200|Grosso instituted by | | | | | | | Enrico Dandolo; weight | | | | | | | in Venetian grains, | | | | | | | 42.1; value=26 piccioli;| | | | | | | 9-6/16 grossi to a lira | 0 108 | 388.61 | .9652| 4.313 | | | | | | | | |1270|Grosso = 28 piccioli; | | | | | | | 8-16/28 grossi to a lira| 0 116 | 360.85 | ... | 4.005 | | | | | | | | |1282|Grosso = 32 piccioli; | | | | | | | 7-1/2 grossi to a lira | 0 13 | 315.75 | ... | 3.504 | | | | | | | | |1350|Grosso = 48 piccioli; | | | | | | | 5 grossi to a lira | 0 2 | 210.5 | ... | 2.336 | | | | | | | | |1379|Weight of the grosso | | | | | | | reduced to 38.4 Venetian| | | | | | | grains; 5 of these | | | | | | | grossi to a lira | ... | 192.0 | ... | 2.130 | | | | | | | | |1399|Weight of grosso reduced | | | | | | | to 35.17 Venetian grains| ... | 175.85 | ... | 1.951 | | | | | | | | |1429|New regulation; the | | | | | | | mark of silver to yield | | | | | | | 31 lire of money | 1 0 | 148.64 | ... | 1.649 | | | | | | | | |1472|Lira (Tron), 36 to mark | ... | 128.0 | ... | 1.395 | | | | | | | | |1527|Lira (Mocenigo) | 1 4 | 105.0 | .9479| 1.144 | | | | | | | | |1561|Institution of the silver| | | | | | | ducat; weight=635.5586 | | | | | | | Venetian grains; | | | | | | | 7-1/4 to a mark | 6 4 | 102.51 | ... | 1.117 | | | | | | | | |1578|Institution of the scudo | 7 0 | 87.86 | ... | 0.957 | | | | | | | | |1608|Scudo raised to | 8 8 | 73.21 | ... | 0.798 | | | | | | | | |1630| " " | 9 0 | 68.33 | ... | 0.746 | | | | | | | | |1665| " " | 9 12 | 63.96 | ... | 0.697 | | | | | | | | |1704| " " | 11 0 | 55.81 | ... | 0.608 | | | | | | | | |1718| " " | 11 14 | 52.47 | ... | 0.573 | | | | | | | | |1739| " " | 12 8 | 49.35 | ... | 0.537 | | | | | | | | |1797|Tollero of the Democrats;| | | | | | | weight = 550 | | | | | | | Venetian grains | 10 0 | 55.0 | ... | 0.522 | +----+-------------------------+------------+-----------+------+--------------+

APPENDIX III

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF SPAIN

The monetary system of Christian Spain dates from the Gothic invasions, and differs from that of Germany, Italy, and France in being derived in the first place from the Roman system without the intermediation of that of Charlemagne.

Under the Goths the monetary basis was the Roman libra, subdivided thus--

1 libra = 8 onzas = 4608 grs. 1 onza = 8 ochavas = 576 grs. 1 ochava = 6 tomines = 72 grs. 1 tomin = 3 quilates or siliqua = 12 grs.

The unit denomination was the sueldo de oro (gold sueldo) = 1/6 onza of the fineness of 23-3/4 quilates (=.989 fine), corresponding exactly to the Roman _aureus_ of the times of Julian.

The unit denomination of the silver money was twofold--(1) the silver _sueldo_ (= 1/6 onza like the gold), and (2) the _denario_ (1/8 onza or ochava). The silver coins were at first of 12 dineros fine, but subsequently only _10.12_ (=.875 fine).

Of these two units, the latter, the silver denario was far the more usual and frequent in use.

With one important change of name, and infinite change of incident and detail, it was this system which obtained till the great reform of the Spanish monetary system under Ferdinand and Isabella.

The change of name consists in the introduction of that of the _maravedi_, which was adopted from the conquered Moors, and applied to designate the sueldo d'oro from the time of the conquest of Toledo.

In a comprehensive way it may be said that the history of this word or name, maravedi, sums up the monetary history of Spain. From being the original gold coin of highest denomination, it came to be a silver coin, then a billon coin of the very lowest denomination, as it is to-day. The process of its degeneration is quite unexampled even in Europe. In addition, also, to the confusion of idea produced by this depreciation there is a further uncertainty, caused by the quite general use of the word or name, i.e. not as the name of a particular coin or money series, but perfectly generally for almost any and every coin--as synonymous, in fact, with the simple word money itself.

Neglecting this latter question, however, as one of nomenclature merely, the course of depreciation of the maravedi may be thus illustrated:--

Maravedi (Moorish coin), fine gold, about 56 grs. By the time of James I. of Aragon, the contents in fine gold had sunk to 14 grs.

Having been still further reduced to 10 grs. under Alfonso the Wise, it was made into a silver coin, as being too small to be expressed in gold.

Its depreciation in this latter form and through its third form of billon money was as follows:--

+-------+---------------------+--------------+ | | Number of Maravedis | Contents of | | Date. | to the | Fine Silver, | | | Cologne Mark. | Grains. | +-------+---------------------+--------------+ | 1312 | 130 | 25.85 | | 1324 | 125 | 26.86 | | 1368 | 200 | 16.79 | | 1379 | 250 | 13.43 | | 1390 | 500 | 6.71 | | 1406 | 1000 | 3.35 | | 1454 | 2250 | 1.49 | | 1550 | 2210 | 1.52 | | 1808 | 5440 | 0.62 | +-------+---------------------+--------------+

To return. At the time of its adoption by the Christian powers of Spain, the maravedi (or sueldo de oro) was equal to 1/6 onza of gold.

To this maravedi de oro was subsequently given the name of _Alfonsi_, supposititiously from Alfonso VI., the first to issue them.

The first important change in this monetary system of Gothic Spain--though one of detail rather than system--was effected by Ferdinand II. of Leon, who, in 1157, coined the silver _leones_ of the value of half the silver sueldo (= 12 dineros).

In 1222 S. Ferdinand introduced the _sueldo pepiones_.

Sueldo de oro = 10 metales or mitgales, 1 metale = 18 pepiones.

But both these importations were suppressed by Alfonso X., the Wise, of Castile.

In 1252 he coined his _maravedis blancos_, or _Burgaleses_, to replace the sueldos pepiones.

6 dineros = 1 sueldo, 15 sueldos = 1 maravedi Burgalese.

This maravedi bore the ratio of 1: 6 to the old maravedi de oro.

This money (Burgalese) was subsequently known as _moneda viejo_, _maravedis viejos_, or _moneda blanca_.

Six years after its introduction, however, Alfonso demonetised his own Burgaleses to make room for his _maravedises negros_, or _prietos_, a money of billon which lasted till the days of Ferdinand and Isabella.

Twenty-three years later Alfonso issued a second "white money" (1281), so called as distinguished from the Burgaleses, mention of which recur.

To the "second white" (_blanco segundo_) was also given the (commoner) name of new (_novenes_). It was issued at one-fourth the value of the _prietos_. The relationship of the novenes to the prietos and to the standard (now supposititious) gold maravedi is thus expressed:--

15 dineros prietos = 1 maravedi, Old maravedi = 75 sueldos, [therefore] 1 prieto = 5 sueldos. Old maravedi = 60 maravedis novenes, [therefore] 1 prieto = 4 maravedis novenes.

Under Alfonso the Wise, therefore, the system was as follows:--

10 dineros = 1 noveno, 4 novenes = 1 maravedi de los prietos (= 5 sueldos of 8 dineros each). 10 novenes = 1 maravedi de los Burgaleses. 60 " = 1 old maravedi.

These _novenes_, or _maravedis blancos segundos_, continued current through the fourteenth century, and in the laws of John III. are spoken of as "maravedises of our present currency," and as still = 1/10 of the maravedises Burgaleses, which latter are spoken of as "maravedises of good currency" (_maravedis de los buenos_).

But by the close of the fourteenth century, owing to the depreciation of the currency, the novenes had come to be looked upon as of better denomination than the then current coin, and are accordingly spoken of as "old" (_viejos_) for distinction's sake.

The only material additions to this system of Alfonso the Wise were briefly--

1. The _coronados_, an innovation of his successor, Sancho IV. (1284-95), who, in 1286, introduced them as = 1 old dinero. They subsequently appear as _cornados_.

In the Cortes of Toledo their relation to the novenes was thus determined:--

6 coronados = 10 novenes = 1 maravedi de moneda vieja (= Burgaleses).

2. The series of gold coins initiated by Alfonso XI. (1302-50).

It was in the reign of this latter King that the general movement of adoption of gold coinage first touched Spain. The earliest gold coins were Alfonso's _doblas_, subsequently known as _castellanos_. The weight of this coin has been variously assigned as 48 to a mark or 50 or 51.

Taking the tale of 50 to the mark, the weight per piece would be 92-4/25 grms. (= 4.60090 grms.) of 23-3/4 quilates fine (= .989 fine).

Pedro I. made gold doblas of the weight of 90 grs., and this endured till the days of John I., 1379-90, who preserved the same weight but lowered the standard. Under Henry III. the standard of 23-3/4 quilates was again restored. For the movement of the gold coins subsequent to Ferdinand and Isabella, see the Table.

3. The silver _real_ first appears under Pedro I., 1350-69. It was issued at a tale of 66 to a mark, and 11 dineros 4 grs. fine.

Under Henry II. of Castile, 1369-79, these reals undergo extraordinary debasement, the standard being reduced to .279, .129, .060, and so on; but a recovery took place under his successor, John I., 1379-90, who returned to the standard of Pedro I., substituting for the debased real his own vellon money, under the titles of _blancos_ and _Agnus Dei_, a money known later as _blancas_ and _maravedises de moneda blanca_.

The restorer of the Spanish coinage was, however, not John so much as his son, Henry III., 1390-1406. By his ordinance of 21st January 1391, issued at the instance of the Cortes of Madrid, 1390, the blancos of John I. were reduced in equivalence to 1 coronado. Gold coins were restored to the tale and standard of Alfonso XI., and the silver real to those of Pedro I.

The vellon money, however, of this reign--the blancos in particular--present a confusion which has hitherto baffled the most learned. It has been computed that one hundred and thirty-two monies of various denominations circulated in Castile under this King.

In brief, the system from his day till the time of Ferdinand and Isabella may be thus tabularly expressed:--

+-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+ | | GOLD | Value as |Value in|| SILVER | Value as |Value in|| BILLON | Value as |Value in| | Reign. | Denomination. | Issued. |Reals. || Denomination. | Issued. | Reals.|| Denomination. | Issued. |Reals. | +-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+ | | | | || | | || | | | |Henry III.}|Florin of |21 maravedis| Reals ||Silver Real |3 maravedis| Reals ||Meaja vieja |1/60 of the | Reals | |1393 }| Aragon | viejos | 19.420 ||Half, } In | viejos | 2.775 || (ideal money) | maravedi viejo | 0.15 | |1394-1406 | " |22 " | 20.350 ||Quarter,} proportion | | ||Meaja nueva |1/60 of maravedi | 0.007 | | | | | ||Fifth, } | | || (ideal money) | nuevo | | | | | | ||In the course of | | ||Dinero viejo |1/10 of maravedi | 0.092 | | | | | || | | || | viejo | | | |Lower and higher denominations occur ||this reign the real | | || " nuevo |1/10 of maravedi | 0.046 | | | | | || | | || | nuevo | | | | separately in 1393, 1398, and 1402 ||of silver was rated | | ||Coronados viejos|1/6 of maravedi | 0.154 | | | | | || | | || | nuevo | | | | | | ||rated variously at | | || " nuevos|1/6 of maravedi | 0.077 | | | | | || | | || | nuevo | | | | | | || 7, 7-1/2, and 8 of | | ||Agnus Dei |1 coronado viejo | 0.154 | | | | | || the maravedis nuevos| | ||Blanca (occurs }|1/4 maravedi viejo| 0.231 | | | | | || | | || after 1440) }| | | | |Ducados |30 viejos | 27.750 || | | ||Cinquen |1/12 real | 0.231 | | | (In the Kingdom| | || | | ||Maravedi viejo |1/3 real | 0.925 | | | of Navarre) |Many other and || | | || " nuevo |1/2 maravedi viejo| 0.462 | | | | different || | | || | | | | | | denominations || | | || | | | | | | | || | | || | | | | | Doblas |35 viejos | 32.375 || | | || | | | | | Castellanos | | || | | || | | | | |(Doblas castellanos | || | | || | | | | | de la Banda | || | | || | | | | | Cruzados | || | | || | | | | | Cruzados de la | || | | || | | | | | Banda | || | | || | | | | | Doblas) | || | | || | | | | | || | | || | | | | | Many different denominations || | | || | | | | | | | || | | || | | | +-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+ | | | | || | | || | | | |John III. }|Florin |22-1/2 | 22.662 ||Reals, 11 dineros | As above |As above|| As above with addition of | | 1406- }| | maravedis| || 4 grs. fine, 66 to | | ||Sueldos |1/2 maravedi (ideal money) | | 1454 }| | viejos | || a mark | | ||Ovulo |1/8 sueldo (ideal money) | | | | | || | | || | | | | Many other different denominations || | | || | | +-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+ |John III. }|Doblas and |35 maravedis| Reals || | | || Blanca vieja |(As blanca above) | Reals | |1406-1454 }| coronas | viejos | 32.375 || | | || " nueva |1/6 maravedi viejo| 0.154 | | | | | || | | || Cornado |1/2 blanca nueva | 0.077 | | |Many other and different denominations|| | | || | | | | | | | || | | || | | | | 1434 |Dobla de la | 104 nuevos | 48.048 || | | || | | | | | Banda | 100 " | 46.2 || | | || | | | | 1442 | " | | || | | || | | | | |(19 quilates | | || | | || | | | | | fine, 49 to | | || | | || | | | | | a mark) | | || | | || | | | +-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+ |Henry IV. }|Florin of Aragon|20 maravedis| 18.220 ||Real of silver |3 maravedis| 2.734 || Meaja vieja | 1/10 of maravedi | | |1454-74 }|(18 quilates | viejos | || | viejos | || | viejo | 0.091 | | | fine) | | || |(Numerous | || Meaja nueva |1/2 of viejo | | | |56 other species| | || | multiples| || Dinero viejo |1/10 of maravedi | | | | of same, and | | || | of it) | || | | | | | of other, and | | || | | || | viejo | 0.091 | | | different | | || | | || Dinero nuevo |1/2 of viejo | | | | denominations | | || | | || | | | | | | | || | | || Agnus Dei }| | | | 1455 |Ducado | 165 " | 30.074 || | | || Blanca }|1/8 of maravedi | 0.152 | | |(23-3/4 quilates| | || | | || Cornado viejo }| viejo | | | | fine, 65-1/3 | | || | | || Cornado nuevo |1/2 of viejo | | | | to a mark), | | || | | || Cincuen }|1/2 maravedi vieja| 0.457 | | | 38 other | | || | | || Blanca }| | | | | species of | | || | | || Maravedi viejo |1/3 of real | 0.911 | | | same, and of | | || | | || | | | | | other and | | || | | || | | | | | different | | || | | || | | | | | denominations | | || | | || | | | | | | | || | | || | | | | |Doblas | 150 " | 27.340 || | | || | | | | |Castellanos | 420 " | 37.040 || | | || | | | | |Enriquez | 210 " | 38.276 || | | || | | | +-----------+----------------+------------+--------++---------------------+-----------+--------++----------------+------------------+--------+

The reign of John II. (1406-54) marks a period of exceeding confusion, coupled with inefficient attempts at legislative remedy. The disorder of his reign was further increased under his successor, Henry IV. (1454-74), years which represent the apogee of Spanish depreciation. By grants of the right of private minting the six official Spanish Mints were increased to not less than 150, with a resulting monetary disorder, dearness of necessaries, and commercial panic which it would be difficult to estimate. The gold monies varied in fineness from 23-1/2, 19, 18, 17, and so on, even to 7 quilates, and the same extraordinary variations marked the silver monies. Of billon monies there were eight distinct classes, representing a succession of fractional parts of the silver real, 1/6, 1/7, 1/8, 1/12, 1/16, 1/22, 1/24, 1/58.

Taking, for the mere purpose of generalisation or average, the gold _Enrique_ of this reign at a tale of 50 to a mark, 23-3/4 quilates fine, and the silver real (= 30 maravedis de blancas) at a tale of 67 to a mark, and standard of 11.4 fine, the ratio of gold to silver for the reign would be 9.824:1.

The monetary situation which the advent of the Catholic kings, Ferdinand and Isabella (1475-1506), was to alleviate and reform was the most deplorable that Spain has ever seen. Not less than eleven ordinances of reform were issued before the close of the century. For practical purposes only the first and last of these require notice. By the Mint indenture, issued on the 26th June 1475 to the Mint master of Seville, the gold coinage was ordered on the following basis:--

Excellentes (at a tale of 25 to a mark, 23-3/4 quilates fine, in value = to 2 castellanos).

And silver on the following basis:--

Silver Reals (at a tale of 67 to a mark, 11 din. 4 grs. fine, in value equal to 30 maravedis).

First and chiefest importance, however, attaches to the ordinance of 1497, issued at Medino del Campo, and so named. By this ordinance all the previous existing systems and monies were abrogated, and a new system instituted which forms the starting-point for the monetary history of that Spain which was to be the receiver and distributor of the gold and silver of the New World.

The standard of gold was fixed at 23-3/4 quilates. The basis of the gold coins was to be the _excellente de la Granada_, issued at an equivalence of two of the antecedent excellentes, and at a tale of 65-1/3 to the mark.

The system of the silver real was as in 1475, but it was issued at an equivalence of 34 maravedis, at which it ever after remained.

The billon money was to consist of _blancas_ (7 grs. fine, and at a tale of 192 to a mark).

One excellente = 11 reals 1 maravedi = 375 maravedis. 1 real " 34 maravedis.

The changes subsequently effected in this system may be presented in skeleton form (see also accompanying Tables).

In 1523 the Cortes of Valladolid presented a petition referring to the changed relation of the two metals, and asking for a recoining on a different ratio. Its proposals were incorporated in the ordinance of 1537, when the scheme was as follows:--

Gold Standard, 22 quilates. " Tale, 68 to a mark. Value, 350 maravedis. Silver Left untouched. Billon Standard increased to 7-1/2 granos.

Under Philip II., by the ordinance of 23rd November 1566, the equivalence of the gold coins was increased a seventh, the silver monies being again left untouched. The increase was partly arbitrary and unprincipled, partly due to the normally prevailing depreciation of silver.

Under Philip III. the intrinsic value or content of the gold monies was decreased 1/10, silver being again left intact.

The innumerable calamities which overtook Spain under Philip IV. (1621-65) and Charles II. (1665-1750) led to an immense introduction of billon money, to so great an extent, indeed, that it fell to one-eighth its previous value, thereby only complicating and increasing the evils. The result was an increasing premium on good monies, coupled with the usual disappearance of them. By the proclamation of 8th March 1625 it was prohibited, on severest penalties, to carry such premium above 10 per cent.; by the succeeding proclamations of 30th April 1636 and 7th September 1641 this limit was raised respectively to 25 per cent, and 50 per cent.

Philip IV. also instituted the first change in the silver system which it underwent since the great reform of 1497.

The tale was increased from 67 to 83-3/4 per mark, the _real of eight_ being henceforth issued at an equivalence of 10 reals.

This change was equivalent to a reduction of 25 per cent. in the silver monies.

Under Charles II. this corruption proceeded in an ascending scale until 1680, when the gold _doblon_ had arrived at an equivalence of 110 reals of billon, and the _real of eight_ to 29 reals of billon.

By the law of 14th October 1686 an attempt was made to re-create and reform the tottering system. The mark of silver (11 din. 4 grs. fine) was to be coined at a tale of 84 pieces. The real of eight received a new name, _Escudo de plata_, and was to issue at an equivalence of 10 reals of the new silver.

The effect of this apparent reform was to lower the weight of the silver money 25 per cent., to incorporate the premium of 50 per cent. on the billon money, and to institute or sanction a matter of four separate monetary units:--

1. The real of old silver = 1/67 mark. 2. The real of new silver = 1/84 mark. 3. The real of billon = 1/126 mark. 4. The real of billon = 1/38 of the double escudo.

At the close of the reign the monetary system was as follows:--

Silver Reals. Mark of fine gold, 1408.94 Of intrinsic value of 1363.15 The seigniorage being 45.79

Mark of fine silver, 90.32 Of intrinsic value of 88.11 The seigniorage being 2.21

Maravedis. Mark of copper, 76 Of intrinsic value of 68 The seigniorage being 8

Philip V. was for many years prevented by the enormous expenditure caused by the revolt of Don Carlos from reform of this system, which he ultimately undertook and carried out. In 1707 he reduced the standard of silver to 10 dineros, of a tale of 75 reals to the mark, creating the money which is distinguished thenceforward by the name of _Plata provincial_.

By the regulation of 9th June 1728 the series of _Plata nacional_ was lowered to 11 dineros fine (= .917) and a tale of 68 reals.

Of more importance was the Mint regulation of 16th July 1730, by which--

Reales de Plata Provincial. Mark of gold of 22 quilates fine was coined into 1360 Delivered to the importer 1280 ---- Seigniorage 80 = 5.88 per cent.

Mark of silver of 11 dineros fine coined into 85 Delivered to the importer 80 ---- Seigniorage 5 = 5.88 per cent.

This ideal system could not be retained, as the billon money fell within a short time a matter of 5-1/2 per cent. in relation to it. The latter change was incorporated by the proclamation of 16th May 1737, which fixed the silver _escudo_ of 10 reals (the old piece of 8 reals) at 170 cuartos, equivalent to the 20 reals of billon at which it continued to be valued. By the subsequent Mint order of 22nd June 1742 the attempt was made to bring the billon money into exact relationship with the gold by the coining of gold pieces equal to 20 reals billon (_veintenes_) struck at a tale of 128 per mark, and fineness of 21-3/4 quilates, in place of the previously existing standard of 22 quilates.

These veintenes correspond to the escudos of 21-1/4 reals still to be found in circulation.

No change of any importance was effected under the short reign of Ferdinand VI. (1746-59), under whom the custom inaugurated by Philip V. of expressing values in reals of billon rather than of silver (_plata provincial_) still continued.

His successor, however, Charles III. (1759-88) effected profound reforms. By the ordinance of 29th May 1772 he accomplished a complete recoinage of the Spanish money. The standards he established were--

Quilates. Granos. Of gold Escudos (oro nacional) 21 2-1/2 " Veintenes (oro provincial) 21 1-1/2

Dineros. Granos. Of silver (plata nacional or gruesa) 10 20 " (plata provincial or menuda) 9 18

being a lowering per cent, of standard as follows:--

Oro nacional 1.31 " provincial 2.84 Plata nacional 1.59 " provincial 2.49

The bearing of this change on the question of the ratio at large in Europe has been already referred to. It was again and still further for the protection of gold that the seigniorage was increased to 7.48 per cent. by the law of 17th July 1779. The later system established in 1786 (see Tables _postea_) has a similar bearing.

His son, Charles IV. (1789-1808), made no alteration in this latter system of Charles III.

Under Ferdinand VII. (1808-32) currency was given (1813-1823) to French gold and silver monies on a certain footing, and the seigniorage on the coins was reduced. Both under Ferdinand, however, and under his successor, Isabella II. (1832-61), this latter regulation proved ineffectual in attracting merchants to bring the metals to the Mint to be coined; and under the circumstances the circulation of French Napoleons was considered a benefit. A profound alteration was projected by the two laws of 1834; the first of which proposed to lower the equivalence of the _real_ to 32 from 34 maravedis, and the standard of silver to 10 dineros 12 granos (=.875), and the second, to prevent the circulation of French money. This scheme was intentionally bimetallic. It failed, however, of accomplishment, and the monetary system remained as before up to 1847.

By the decree of 31st May 1847--(1) the decimal division of the real was adopted; (2) the weight of the real was established at 25 granos and standard at .900; (3) a new gold coin of 100 reals of the weight of 161-1/2 granos of the same alloy was introduced.

This system was of course a reproduction of that of France; but in the following year it underwent slight alteration, as already related. By the law of 1st January 1859 the French metrical system was adopted in its entirety by Spain, and since 1st January 1876 Spain reckons in pesetas (representing the French franc) and centesimos (representing the French centime)--100 centesimos = 1 peseta. The new gold coins are pieces of 5, 10, 20, and other multiples of the peseta. The peseta (5 grms. silver, .835 fine) is token money, but the 5-peseta pieces (25 grms. silver, .900 fine) are legal tender.

5 pesetas = 1 duro ("hard dollar," "Spanish dollar," or piastre). 1 duro = 2 escudos. 1 escudo = 10 reals. 1 real = 34 maravedis.

TABLE OF THE GOLD COINS OF SPAIN FROM THE REFORMATION OF THE COINAGE IN 1476.

(From _Breve Reseña Historica Critica de la Moneda Española_, p. 93.)

+-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+------------------+-------+-----------+----------+ | Reign. | Coins and |Tale |Standard.| Mint Value |Value | Value of |Value of | | | Ordinances. |or | | per Mark. |of each| each |each such | | | |Number | +--------+---------+Old | successive|successive| | | |of | | Bullion|Ordinance|Real | particular|particular| | | |Pieces | | Value. |Value in |in the | Money |Old Money | | | |per | | |Coin as |Modern | named, |in Reals | | | |Mark. | | |issued. |Money. | in Reals |of To-day.| | | | | | | | | of the | | | | | | | | | | Date of | | | | | | | | | | Issue. | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Ferdinand | Mint Ordinance of | |Quilates.| Reals. | Reals. | |Reals.Mvds.|Reals | |and |Feb. 22, 1476, | | | | | | | (Vellon)| |Isabella. |June 14, 1497-- | | Granos. | | | | | | | | Excellentes | 25 }| | | | | 28 28 | 121.91 | | | majores | }| | | | | | | | | | }| | | | | | | | | Medios excellenes }| }| | | | | | | | | }| }| | | | | | | | | Doblas }| 50 }| | | | | 14 14 | 60.95 | | | }| }| | | | | | | | | Castellanos }| }| | | | | | | | | | }| | | | | | | | | Excellentes de la }| }| | | | | | | | | Granada }|65-1/3}| 22 3 | 716.98| 720.22 | 4.185 | 7 7 | 46.67 | | | }| }| | | | | | | | | Ducados }| }| (= .989)| | | | | | | | | }| | | | | | | | | Aguilas }| 67 }| | | | | 10 25 | 45.48 | | | Florines }| }| | | | | | | | | | }| | | | | | | | | Escudos }| }| | | | | | | | | }| 68 }| | | | | 10 29 | 41.82 | | | Coronas }| }| | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Charles V. |1537-- | | | | | | | | | | New coining of | 68 | 22 0 | 696.85| 700.0 | 3.991 | 10 10 | 41.09 | | | escudos | | (= .917)| | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Philip II. |Nov. 23, 1586-- | | | | | | | | | | The escudo | | | | | | | | | | increased to 400 | | | | | | | | | | maravedis. | 68 | 22 0 | 766.40| 800.0 | 3.493 | 11 26 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Philip III.|1609-- }| | | | | | | | | | The escudo }| | | | | | | | | | increased to }| | | | | | | | | | 440 maravedis }| | | | | | | | | | }| 68 | 22 0 | 847.09| 880.0 | 3.175 | 12 32 | 41.09 | | |Dec. 13, 1612-- }| | (=.917) | | | | | | | | Castellanos of 22 }| | | | | | | | | | quilates at 576 }| | | | | | | | | | maravedis }| | | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Philip IV. |Dec. 23, 1642-- | | | | | | | | | | Escudo increased | | | | | | | | | | to 550 maravedis | 68 | 22 0 | 1058.86| 1100.0 | 2.540 | 22 17 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | |Jan. 12, 1643-- | | | | | | | | | | Escudo increased | | | | | | | | | | to 612 maravedis | 68 | 22 0 | 1178.23| 1224.0 | 2.283 | 22 17 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Charles II.|Oct. 14 and Nov. | | | | | | | | | | 26, 1686-- | | | | | | | | | | Escudo increased | | | | | | | | | | to 646 maravedis,| | | | | | | | | | and castellano to| | | | | | | | | | 850 maravedis of | | | | | | | | | | the new silver | 68 | 22 0 | 1250.0 | 1292.0 | 2.163 | 38 17 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Philip V. |March 17, 1719-- | | | | | | | | | | Castellanos | | | | | | | | | | reduced to 714 | | | | | | | | | | maravedis | 68 | 22 0 | 1050.0 | 1088.0 | 2.567 | 20 04 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Jan. 14 and 23, and | | | | | | | | | | Feb. 8, 1726-- | | | | | | | | | | Escudo increased | | | | | | | | | | from 544 to 612 | | | | | | | | | | maravedis | 68 | 22 0 | 1181.25| 1224.0 | 2.282 | 33 10 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Sept. 2, 1728-- | | | | | | | | | | Escudo increased | | | | | | | | | | to 680 maravedis | 68 | 22 0 | 1312.0 | 1360.0 | 2.054 | 37 22 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |July 16, 1730-- | | | | | | | | | | New monetary scheme| 68 | 22 0 | 1280.0 | 1360.0 | 2.054 | 31 22 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | Reals | | | | | | | | | |(Vellon)| | | | | | |June 23 and 29, | | | | | | | | | | 1742-- | | | | | | | | | | Creation of | | | | | | | | | | Veintenes de oro |130- | 21 3 | 2409.42| 2611.33| 1.069 | 20 0 | 21.38 | | | | 56/100| (=.906) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Ferdinand |Aug. 19 and Sept. | | | | | | | | | VI. | 16, 1755-- | | | | | | | | | | Increase of the | | | | | | | | | | pastas de oro | | | | | | | | | | from 118 to 119 | | | | | | | | | | reales las tres | | | | | | | | | | ochavas. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Escudos | | | | | | | | | | (oro nacional) | 68 | 22 O | 2538.68| 2560.0 | 1.091 | 37 22 | 41.09 | | | | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | Veintenes | | | | | | | | | | (oro provincial) |130- | 21 3 | 2538.21| 2611.33| 1.069 | 20 0 | 21.38 | | | | 56/100| (=.906) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Charles |May 21 and 25, | | | | | | | | | III. | 1772-- | | | | | | | | | | General reformation| | | | | | | | | | and lowering of | | | | | | | | | | the standard. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Escudos | | | | | | | | | | (oro nacional) | 68 | 21 2-1/2| 2495.18| 2520.0 | 1.076 | 37 17 | 40.38 | | | | | (=.901) | | | | | | | | Veintenes | | | | | | | | | | (oro provincial) |130- | 21 1-1/2| 2476.15| 2611.33| 1.039 | 20 0 | 20.78 | | | | 56/100| (=.891) | | | | | | | |July 16, and | | | | | | | | | | Aug. 24, 1779-- | | | | | | | | | | The doblon of 8 | 68 | 21 2-1/2| 2516.55| 2720.0 | 1.009 | 40 0 | 40.38 | | | escudos reduced | | (=.901) | | | | | | | | to 320 reals | | | | | | | | | | (oro nacional) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | The doblon of | | | | | | | | | | 8 escudos reduced|130- | | | | | | | | | to 320 reals | 56/100| 21 1-1/2| 2486.25| | | | | | | (oro provincial) | | (=.891) | | 2611.33| 1.039 | 20 0 | 20.78 | | | | | | | | | | | | |March 7, 1781-- | | | | | | | | | | Oz. of bullion | | | | | | | | | | increased to | 68 | 21 2-1/2| 2642.2 | 2720.0 | 1.009 | 40 0 | 40.38 | | | 336 reals | | (=.901) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |Feb. 26 & June 5, | | | | | | | | | | 1786-- | 68 | 21 0 | 2565.81| 2720.0 | 0.980 | 40 0 | 39.20 | | | Lowering of | | (=.875) | | | | | | | | standard. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oro nacional. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oro provincial |131- | 20 1-1/2| 2606.53| 2633.14| 0.982 | 20 0 | 19.65 | | | | 23/35 | (=.849) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Fernando |Oct. 19, 1821-- | | | | | | | | | VII. | Reform of the | | | | | | | | | | rating. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oro nacional | 68 | 21 0 | 2686.26| 2720.0 | 0.980 | 40 0 | 39.20 | | | | | (=.875) | | | | | | | | Oro provincial |131- | 20 1-1/2| 2606.53| 2633.14| 0.982 | 20 0 | 19.65 | | | | 23/35 | (=.849) | | | | | | | |Aug. 20, 1824-- | | | | | | | | | | Similar reform. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Oro nacional | 68 | 21 0 | 2660.16| 2720.0 | 0.980 | 40 0 | 39.20 | | | | | (=.875) | | | | | | | | Oro provincial |131- | 20 1-1/2| 2581.1 | 2633.14| 0.982 | 20 0 | 19.65 | | | | 23/35 | (=.849) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+ |Isabel II. |April 15, 1848-- | | | | | | | | | | Reform of the | | | | | | | | | | monetary system. | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Centenes |27-6/10| 21 2-3/5| 2736.0 | 2760.0 | 0.993 | 100 0 | 99.30 | | | | | (=.900) | | | | | | | |May 17, 1850-- | | | | | | | | | | Augmentation of | | | | | | | | | | the tale | 28 | 21 2-3/5| 2736.0 | 2800.0 | 0.979 | 100 0 | 97.90 | | | | | (=.900) | | | | | | | |Feb. 3, 1854-- | | | | | | | | | | Reform of the | | | | | | | | | | monetary system |27- | 21 2-3/5| 2716.20| 2743.0 | 1.0 | 100 0 | 100.0 | | | | 43/100| (=.900) | | | | | | | |Jan. 18, 1861-- | | | | | | | | | | Reform of the | | | | | | | | | | tariff |27- | 21 2-3/5| 2729.18| 2743.0 | 1.0 | 100 0 | 100.0 | | | | 43/100| (=.900) | | | | | | +-----------+--------------------+-------+---------+--------+---------+-------+-----------+----------+

TABLE OF THE SILVER COINS OF SPAIN FROM THE REFORMATION OF THE COINAGE IN 1497.

+---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ | | | | |Value of|Value of|Value of the|Equivalence| | Reign. | Denomination. |Tale |Standard.|the Mark|the Mark|Real as |of the Old | | | |(per | |by Mint |by Mint |Issued in |Real with | | | |Mark).| |Regula- |Regula- |Billon Reals|the Modern | | | | | |tions in|tions in|of the Time.|Real. | | | | | |Bullion.|Coin as | | | | | | | | |Issued. | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ | | |Silver|Dineros. | Silver | Silver |Reals. Mvds.| Reals. | | | |Reals.| Granos.| Reals. | Reals. | | | | | | | | | | | | |Ferdinand|June 2, 1497-- | | | | | | | |and | General reform of| 67.0 | 11 4 | 66.0 | 67.0 | 1 0 | 2.734 | |Isabella | the Monies | | (=.930) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Philip |December 23, }| | | | | | | | IV. | 1642-- }| | | | | | | | |January 12, }| | | | | | | | | 1643-- }| 83.75| 11 4 | 81.0 | 83.75 | 3 0 | 2.186 | | | Recoinage | | (= .930)| | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Charles |October 14, 1686--| 84.0 | 11 4 | 82.0 | 84.0 | 1 30 | 2.179 | | II. | Recoinage | | (=.930) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Philip V.|1706-- | | | | | | | | | Reales sencillos | 84.0 | 11 4 | 68.0 | 84.0 | 1 30 | 2.179 | | | of 4, 2, and 1 | | (=.930) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |1707-- | | | | | | | | | Reales sencillos | | | | | | | | | of 4, 2, and 1 | | | | | | | | | (and parts and | 75.0 | 10 0 | 60.82 | 75.0 | 1 30 | 2.187 | | | multiples) | | (=.834) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |July 15, 1709-- | 68.0 | 11 0 | 65.0 | 68.0 | 1 30 | 2.654 | | | Reals of 8 and 4 | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |February 8, 1719--| | | | | | | | | Decrease of the | | | | | | | | | reals of 8 to | 80.75| 11 0 | 77.18 | 80.75 | 1 30 | 2.234 | | | 9-1/2 | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |August 10, 1728-- | | | | | | | | | Reals (and parts)| | | | | | | | | plata | 77.0 | 10 0 | 63.69 | 77.0 | 1 30 | 2.130 | | | provincial | | (=.834) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |September 8, | | | | | | | | | 1728-- | | | | | | | | | Decrease of the | 85.0 | 11 0 | 81.23 | 85.0 | 1 30 | 2.123 | | | real of 8 to 10| | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |July 16, 1730-- | | | | | | | | | New monetary | | | | | | | | | regulation | | | | | | | | | (plata | 85.0 | 11 0 | 80.0 | 85.0 | 1 30 | 2.123 | | | nacional) | | (=.917) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |May 10, 1737-- |Reals | | | | | | | | Decrease of the | of | | | | | | | | real of 8 to 20|Billon| | | | | | | | reals (1 real | | | | | | | | | of silver = 1 | | | | | | | | | real 30 | | | | | | | | | maravedis of |85.170| 11 0 | 160.0 | 170.0 | 2 0 | 1.061 | | | billon) | | (=.917) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ | Same | Decrease of the | | | | | | | | date. | real of 8 to 20| | | | | | | | | reals (plata |77.154| 10 0 | 145.45 | 154.0 | 2 0 | 1.065 | | | provincial) | | (=.834) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Charles |May 21, 1772-- | | | | | | | | III. | General reduction| | | | | | | | | of the standard|170.0 | 10 20 | 157.59 | 170.0 | 1 0 | 1.045 | | | (plata | | (=.903) | | | | | | | nacional) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | General reduction| | | | | | | | | of the standard| | | | | | | | | (plata |154.0 | 9 18 | 141.81 | 154.0 | 1 0 | 1.038 | | | provincial) | | (=.812) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Ferdinand|October 19, 1821--| | | | | | | | VII. | Reform (plata |170.0 | 10 20 | 164.67 | 170.0 | 1 0 | 1.045 | | | nacional) | | (=.903) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Reform (plata | | | | | | | | | provincial) |154.0 | 9 18 | 150.30 | 154.0 | 1 0 | 1.038 | | | | | (=.812) | | | | | | |August 21, 1821-- | | | | | | | | | Reform (plata |170.0 | 10 20 | 163.47 | 170.0 | 1 0 | 1.045 | | | nacional) | | (=.903) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | Reform (plata |154.0 | 9 18 | 147.07 | 154.0 | 1 0 | 1.038 | | | provincial) | | (=.812) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+ |Isabel |April 15, 1848-- | | | | | | | | II. | General reform | | | | | | | | | of the monetary|175.0 | 10 19 | 172.80 | 175.0 | 100 cents. | 1.012 | | | system | | (=.900) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |October 14, 1849--| | | | | | | | | Reduction | | | | | | | | | of the tale of |176.25| 10 19 | 172.80 | 176.25 | 100 0 | 1.005 | | | silver | | (=.900) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |February 3, 1851--| | | | | | | | | General reform | | | | | | | | | of the monetary|177.20| 10 19 | 174.60 | 177.20 | 100 0 | 1.0 | | | system | | (=.900) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |January 18, 1861--| | | | | | | | | Reform of the |177.20| 10 19 | 175.77 | 177.20 | 100 0 | 1.0 | | | tariff | | (=.900) | | | | | +---------+------------------+------+---------+--------+--------+------------+-----------+

TABLE OF THE BILLON MONEY OF SPAIN FROM THE REFORMATION OF THE COINAGE IN 1497.

+-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ | | | |Tale | | |Mint Value |Bullion Value| |Reign. |Denomination. |Representative Value of |(per |Weight of |Standard. |of Each |of Each | | | | each Money. |Mark.)|Each Piece.| |Piece. |Piece. | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ |Ferdinand |June 14, 1492-- | | | Granos. |Dineros. Granos.|Reals. Mdvs.|Reals. Mdvs. | |and | Coining of blancas |Half maravedi | 192 | 24.0 | 0 7 | 2 28 | 2 3 | |Isabella. | | | | | (=.024) | | | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ |Charles V. |May 23, 1552-- | | | | | | | | | Lowering of the | | | | | | | | | standard of billon|Half maravedi | 192 | 24.0 | 0 5-1/2 | 2 28 | 1 24-5/8 | | | | | | | (=.019) | | | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ |Philip II. |December 14, 1566-- | | | | | | | | | {|Cuartillos of 8-1/2 maravedis| 80 | 57.6 |} | | | | | Vellon rico {|Cuartos of 4 maravedis | 170 | 27.10588 |} 2 14 | 20 0 | 17 8 | | | {|Medios of 2 maravedis | 340 | 13.55294 |} (=.216) | | | | | Blancos |Medio maravedi | 220 | 20.94545 | 0 4 | 3 8 | 1 31-1/2 | | | | | | | (=.014) | | | | |1599-- | | | | | | | | | (Pure copper) |Cuartos of 4 maravedis | 34 |135.52941 |} | | | | | |Ochavas of 2 maravedis | 68 | 67.76470 |} pure copper | 4 0 | 1 0 | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ |Philip IV. |December 23, 1642-- | | | | | | | | | {|Cuartillos of 8-1/2 maravedis| 80 | 57.6 |} | | | | | Vellon rico {|Cuartos of 4 maravedis | 170 | 27.10588 |} 2 14-1/2 | 20 0 | 12 5 | | | {|Medios of 2 maravedis | 340 | 13.55294 |} (=.217) | | | | |October 29, 1660-- | | | | | | | | | Issue of "Molino" |Pieces of 16 maravedis | | | | | | | | | (8, 4 and 2 in proportion) | 51 | 90.35294 | 1 8 | 24 0 | 6 3 | | | | | | | (=.069) | | | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+ |Charles II.|May 22, 1680-- | | | | | | | | | (This and succeeding| | | | | | | | | issues are of pure| | | | | | | | | copper) | | | | | | | +-----------+---------------------+-----------------------------+------+-----------+----------------+------------+-------------+

APPENDIX IV

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF THE NETHERLANDS

In its earliest known form the Netherlands monetary system reproduces those features of the Carlovingian system which reappear alike in Italy, France, and England.

The ideal Flemish pound was divided into 20 schellingen, the schelling into 12 grooten.

This was entirely an ideal system; the actual coins being, at first, the silver denarius, divided into obols. This ideal system of pounds, schellings, and groots survived in Flanders and the Southern Netherlands (now the kingdom of Belgium) long after it had been superseded in the Northern Provinces (the United Netherlands) by another equally ideal system, that of the gulden and stiver.

According to this latter system the Flemish pound was divided into 6 gulden, the gulden into 20 stivers. As between the two systems, therefore, the Northern gulden was equal to 3-1/3 Southern schellings, and the Northern stiver to 2 Southern groots.

The earliest mention of the stivers occurs in 1355, but it was a considerable time before the new system displaced the old one in the Northern Provinces, and the reckoning by schellings and groots as well as, or alongside of, that by gulden and stivers occurs in Holland even as late as the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries.

The weight system employed for the precious metals was as follows:--

1 pound troy = 2 marks. 1 mark = 8 oz. 1 oz. = 20 engels. 1 engel = 32 azen.

So that 160 engels or 5120 azen made up the mark.

In reckoning the standard or alloy, the weight system was--

For silver--1 mark = 12 pfennige or deniers. " = 288 grs. (12 x 24). For gold--1 mark = 24 carats. " = 288 grs. (24 x 12).

Although forming part of the Holy Roman Empire (being included in the Burgundian Circle), the Mint system of the Empire has apparently never obtained in the Netherlands. The Counts of Holland, from the days of Floris II. and Jan I. (i.e. from 1256 onwards) have minted on their own account, as have also the Counts of Flanders from a much more remote date. The silver _deniers_ of the Counts of Flanders date from at least the days of Count Arnold II. (964-989). The introduction of "la grosse monnaie" (whence gros and groots), in imitation of the French money, dates from the reign of Marguerite, Countess of Flanders (1244-1280), or possibly earlier; and the gold coinage (_royaux_, in imitation of those of Philip the Long of France, and _florins_, in imitation of those of Florence) dates from Count Louis de Crécy (1322-1346).

The interest, however, attaching to the monies of the Counts of Flanders and Holland up to the close of the fifteenth century is prevailingly numismatic, as, in the absence of a continuous series of Mint indentures, it is a matter of almost insuperable difficulty to construct tables of the coins. The chief indications are contained in the tariffs already referred to (_supra_, text, pp. 79-83), but their testimony bears more expressly on exchange rates rather than upon Mint rate and standard.

The table of the groot, according to this source, is as follows:--

Engel. Azen. 1336. 9-pfennige weight, 1 9 1376. 4.16 " 2 4 1388. 5 " 1 23 1393. 5 " 1 20 1422. 4 " 2 16 1489. 5 " 1 5

The foundations of a national Mint, or monetary system for the Netherlands, were first laid by the ordinance issued by the Emperor Maximilian at Breda on the 14th December 1489.

According to this ordinance the gold _double florin_ was to be struck at a tale of 44-3/4 to the mark Troy, of a fineness of 23-7/8 carats, and issued at an equivalence of 80 gros.

The remaining gold coins were to comprise the _St. Andries florin_ = 40 groschen (and its half); while the silver coins were to comprise--

Gros = 1 gros. Pattart = 2 " Double pattart = 4 " Grand double = 8 "

In great part this is to be regarded as an ideal or unrealised system. The first effectual regulation of the silver coinage was made in the ordinance of Charles V. of 22nd February 1542.

This ordinance prescribed the minting of the silver _carolus_, in imitation of the Dutch thaler.

Weight to be 14 engels, 30 azen. Standard to be 10 pfennige (= .853 fine). Equivalence to be 20 stivers.

The practical effect of this measure, therefore, was to introduce a coin equal to, and therefore representative of, the hitherto fictitious or merely ideal _gulden_.

The remaining tariffs of the succeeding hundred years or so, together with the bimetallic experience of the Netherlands, have been already briefly described in the text (_supra_, pp. 71, 77). On the declaration of independence by the Northern Provinces, and the separation of the United Netherlands from the Southern or Spanish Netherlands, which succeeded, the monetary history of these two portions of the Low Countries bifurcates.

We are here concerned only with that of the Northern or United or Dutch Provinces, as being of more commercial interest in European history of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries.

By Article 12 of the Union, each of the seven United Provinces was bound to conformity in the course or tariffing of its money, while left free to determine the species and mere numismatic detail of the coins.

The various tariffs therefore, already described, contain the Mint law as applied to the United Provinces; but it was not until 1606 that a serious attempt at systematisation was made. By the great plakkaat of 21st March 1606, completed by that of 6th July 1610, a new and very full tariff was imposed; an important regulation was made, declaring all coins which lacked more than 1-1/2 engels over and above the remedy, to be taken as bullion and not current as coin, and the indenture details of the gold coins were fixed, as it proved, throughout the life of the Republic.

The gold rijder and the gold ducat were prescribed as follows:--

GOLD RIJDER.

Weight (gross), 207.2 azen (= 9.95 grs.). " (of fine gold), 187.77 azen (= 9.11 grs.). Standard, 22 carat (= .9167). (Equivalence = 10 fl. 2 st.).

GOLD DUCAT.

Weight (gross), 72-1/2 azen (= 3.494 grs.). " (of fine gold), 71.43 azen (=3.432 grs.). Standard = 23 carat 8 grs. (= .9826). (Equivalence = 3 fl. 16 st.).

By Article 23 of this same ordinance of 1606, the further minting of billon money was forbidden, and at the same time it was enacted, with regard to the lower denominations of silver coins (schillings and smaller pieces), that not more than one-tenth of any total settlement should be tenderable in them, in case of sums exceeding 100 guldens.

The succeeding experience of the effect of these tariffs, involving, as they did, the almost total disappearance of the great silver coins, even already by the year 1638, led in 1659 to the institution of two new silver coins--(1) the silver ducat, .868 fine, and containing 507 azen fine silver; and (2) the silver rijder, .937 fine; and containing 634.75 azen fine silver.

By the plakkaat of 25th December 1681, the states of Holland and West Friezland prescribed the minting of the gulden piece, thus at last making the gulden, so long simply an ideal money or money of account, a real coin, and laying the basis of a truer national currency system.

By subsequent proclamations and resolutions of the States-General of the 17th March 1694, and 31st December 1699, this was adopted for all the United Provinces.

The single gulden piece was to be of the standard of 10 pf. 22-1/2 grs., and to contain 200 azen fine silver.

This coin remained the mint coin of the Dutch system, without any further alteration of tariff, or any need of it till 1806.

With regard to the development of a specific law of tender, the legislation of the United Provinces was peculiarly involved. The first declaration of a wide nature was that of the 26th September 1686, which reduced certain coins,--the silver ducat and two others--to the position of trade money merely. This was repeated in the declaration of the States-General of the 7th August 1691. The declaration of the 1st August 1749 ascribed a similarly restricted character, of trade money merely, to all gold coins except the gold rijder and its half. These latter were fixed at an equivalence of 14 and 7-florin respectively. The gold ducats were not fixed, their course as trade money might fluctuate daily. They might be taken freely by weight, and at values determined by the course of trade.

The meaning of this provision can only be read in the light of the experience of the preceding half century. Up to this date (1749) there had existed, in theory, a silver standard with gold rated to it by each succeeding tariff. The fall of silver throughout the seventeenth century had acted adversely on gold, and for long the currency had consisted almost entirely of silver. This fall received some slight check in the earlier part of the eighteenth century, and the result was a reverse tendency. Gold came back into circulation, and the full weighted silver coins began to flow out and away. A bitter cry was accordingly raised in 1720 by the commercial community, and already in 1720 the Mint authorities had proposed the adoption of the gold rijder as standard, in order to stop the drain.

In 1749, however, the Mint officials felicitated themselves on the non-adoption of this proposal, and prayed that the ducat should be merely declared trade money (26th March 1749); and it was on this advice that the plakkaat of 31st March 1749 passed. It proved insufficient to prevent the export of silver, and on the 1st August following, the States-General issued an order creating the gold rijder provisionally the standard. The right of coining it was reserved to the State, so that there was no standard in the modern sense.

The influence of this measure proved to be very slight, and 172 merchants of Amsterdam petitioned the States-General to declare the tenderableness of the ducat again. The result of a further communication from the Mint officials was the proclamation and ordinance of 1st May 1750, according to which only the gold rijder and half-rijder were declared standard, and all other gold species only trade money. Gradually, however, what the Government had been unable to effect by legislation was accomplished by the mere force of a rise in gold or fall in silver. The gold rijders began to disappear, the complaints as to the disappearance of silver ceased, and the regulations of 1749 and 1750 were superseded. At the time of the French Revolution, therefore, the silver standard was actually in force. Nominally the gold rijder was still legal tender at 14 florins, but actually few specimens of it were in circulation.

In 1798 the establishment of the Batavian Republic necessitated the creation of a Batavian Mint, and on the 12th February 1800 the First Chamber was called upon to consider the coins.

It was not, however, until the year 1806, after the Republic had been superseded by the imposition of Louis Napoleon as King of Holland, that an effectual system was enunciated. By the resolution of 15th December 1806, a double standard was adopted.

GOLD STANDARD COINS.

_Gold Penning_ of 20 francs, 18 to the mark. Alloy, 22 carats gold, 16 grs. silver. Weight, 8 engels 28-4/9 azen. Content of fine gold, 260-3/4 azen.

STANDARD SILVER COINS.

_Fifty-stuiver piece_--9-5953/17543 to the mark. Weight, 17 engels 4-7/32 azens. Standard, 10 pen. 22-3/4 grs.

_Gulden_--23-6111/17543 to the mark. Weight, 6 engels 27-23/80 azens.

With the annihilation of the Napoleonic structure this scheme perished, and the law of 28th September 1816 erected a system in which elements of both those previously existing were combined.

The coinage was prescribed to consist of gold and silver standard pieces, and gold and silver trade pieces.

The standard coins were--

1. _The Silver Gulden_-- Weight = 7 engels (= 10.766 grms.). Content of fine silver = 200 azen (= 9.613 grms.). Standard = .893.

This was to be the unit, and divided decimally.

2. The gold piece of 10 _Gulden_ .900 fine. Weight 140 azen (6.729 grms.).

TRADE COINS.

1. _Silver Dukaat_-- Weight 18 engels 8-2209/11200 azen (28.78 grs.). Standard, 10 pen. 10 grs. (= .868).

2. _Silver Rijder_-- Weight, 21 engels 5-59/80 azen (= 52.574 grs.). Standard, 11 pen. 5-3/4 grs. (= .937).

3. _Gold Dukaat_-- Weight, 2 engels 8-24/55 azen (= 3.494 grs.). Standard, 23 kr. 7 grs. (= .983).

The trade money was only minted for private accompt. The unit gulden and the 3-gulden piece were also minted for private accompt, but the divisional silver money, the copper money, and the gold standard 10-gulden piece were only to be minted on Government account.

By Article 15 of this law the franc was adopted in the Southern provinces on a footing of

1 franc = 47-1/4 carats.

1 gulden = 2 francs 11-61/100 centimes.

Finally, by Article 18, the tender of copper was limited to 1 gulden, and that of the smaller silver denomination to one-fifth of the amount of settlement.

By the succeeding law of 22nd March 1839, the silver Netherland gulden was prescribed to be of the weight of 10 wigtje's or grms., and .945 fine.

This prescription was retained as to the gulden in the more important Act of 26th November 1847.

This Act definitely established the silver standard. The standard coins were declared to be the gulden (and its half) and the rijksdaalder (= 2-1/2 guldens). The gold _William_ and the gold _dukaat_ were declared to be trade money, and the minor or divisional silver coins (25 cents and under) were fixed at a fineness of .645. The gold William was to weigh 6.729 grms., .900 fine (content of pure gold, therefore, to be 6.056 grms.). The gold dukaat was to weigh 3.494 grms., .983 fine (therefore to contain 3.4345 grms. fine gold).

The coinage of standard silver coins, and of gold trade coins, was left free to individuals (Article 18). The trade money was expressly declared to be no legal tender (_geen wettig betaalmiddel_, Article 20).

The tender of silver divisional coins was limited to 10 guldens, and that of copper coins to 1 gulden.

This silver standard continued in force until 1872. In that year, however, in consequence of the fall of silver, a Bill was passed to suspend the coining of silver for private accompt. The Mint was closed to its coinage, and for a time Holland had no metallic standard at all, as gold was only merchandise or trade money. This state of things led to the enactment of the law of 6th June 1875, which introduced the gold standard, but under peculiar arrangements.

The standard coins were declared to be--_beside_, or in addition to, the silver standard coins minted previously to the new law--the gold 10-gulden piece, .900 fine, containing 6.048 grs. fine gold (weight, therefore, 6.720 grms.).

The minting of these latter was declared free to the individual, and the minting of the gold Williams ordered to cease (Articles 5 and 6).

No further declaration was made as to tender, so that the standard is to be regarded as a limping rather than a gold standard proper.

TABLE OF THE SILVER COINS OF THE NETHERLANDS.

From Mees, '_Geschiedenis van het bankwezen in Nederland,'_ with additions from 1690.

+-------------+--------------------+------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ | | | | | | | | | Date of | | | | | | Weight of | | Law. | Name of Species. | Weight. | Standard. | Weight of | Equivalence.| Metal Fine in | | | | | | Metal | | the Gulden. | | | | | | Fine. | | | +-------------+--------------------+------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ | | | Eng. Az. | Penn. Grein. | Az. | Guil. St. | Az. | |Feb. 22, 1542|Karolus gulden | 14.30 | 9 23 | 396.674 | 1 0 | 396.674 | |June 4, 1567 |Bourgondrische or | | | | | | | | Kruisdaalder | 19.1 | 10 16 | 541.333 | 1 12 | 338.333 | |Feb. 10, 1577|Staten daalder | 20.0 | 8 22 | 475.555 | 1 12 | 297.222 | |Apr. 19, 1583|Nederland | | | | | | | | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 15 | 534.792 | 2 2 | 254.663 | |Aug. 4, 1586 |Nederland reaal | 22.13 | 9 23 | 595.01 | 2 10 | 238.004 | |Mar. 21, 1606|Nederland | | | | | | | | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 12 | 528.5 | 2 7 | 224.894 | | '' |Leeuwendaalder | 18.0 | 8 22 | 428.0 | 1 18 | 225.263 | | '' |10-stuiver piece | 3.28 | 11 0 | 113.666 | 0 10 | 227.333 | |Tolerantie,} | | | | | | | | June 28, } |Nederland | | | | | | | 1608 } | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 12 | 528.5 | 2 8 | 220.208 | | Tariff, } |Leeuwendaalder | 18.0 | 8 22 | 428.0 | 1 18 | 225.263 | | July 6, } |10-stuiver piece | 3.28 | 11 0 | 113.666 | 0 10 | 227.333 | | 1610 } | | | | | | | |Sep. 26, 1615|Nederland | | | | | | | | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 12 | 528.5 | 2 8 | 220.208 | | '' |Leeuwendaalder | 18.0 | 8 22 | 428.0 | 2 0 | 214.0 | |Feb. 13, 1619|Leeuwendaalder | 18.0 | 8 22 | 428.0 | 2 0 | 214.0 | |July 21, 1622|Nederland | | | | | | | | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 12 | 528.5 | 2 10 | 211.4 | |Tolerantie, |Leeuwendaalder | 18.0 | 8 22 | 428.0 | 2 0 | 214.0 | |Oct. 9, 1638 |Nederland | | | | | | | | rijksdaalder | 18.28 | 10 12 | 528.5 | 2 10 | 211.4 | |Mar. 6, 1645 |Dakaton of Brabant | 21.7 | 11 6-1/2 | 637.741 | 3 3 | 202.458 | | " |Patacon (or | | | | | | | | kruisdaalder or | | | | | | | | kruisrijksdaalder)| 18.12 | 10 11 | 512.458 | 2 10 | 204.983 | |Aug. 11, 1659|Nederland silver | | | | | | | | rijder | 21.5.72 | 11 6 | 635.362 | 3 3 | 201.702 | | " |Nederland silver | | | | | | | | dukaat | 18.8.2 | 10 10 | 507.118 | 2 10 | 202.847 | |Sept. 25,} | | | | | | | | 1681 } | | | | | | | |Dec. 22, } | | | | | | | | 1686 } |3-gulden piece |20.17-86/100| 11 0 | 603.038 | 3 0 | 201.013 | |Aug. 7, } |Gulden | 6.27-46/100| 10 22-1/2 | 200.035 | 1 0 | 200.035 | | 1691 } | | | | | | | |March 17,} | | | | | | | | 1694 } | | | | | | | +-------------+--------------------+------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+---------------+ |1806 (Louis} |Gulden | 6.27-23/20 | 10.22-3/4 | ... | ... | ... | | Napoleon) } |50-stuiver piece |17.4-7/32 | 10.22-3/4 | ... | ... | ... | |Sep. 28, 1816|Gulden | 7.0 | 0.893 fine | 200 azen | ... | ... | |Nov. 26, 1847|Gulden | 10 grms. | 0.945 fine |9.-450/1000| ... | ... | | | | | | grms. | | | +-------------+--------------------+------------+---------------+-----------+-------------+---------------+

TABLE OF THE GOLD COINS OF THE NETHERLANDS.

(From Mees, as above, with additions.)

+-------------+----------------+----------+-----------+---------+------------+-------------+ | Date of | | | |Weight of| |Weight of | | Law. |Name of Species.| Weight. |Standard. | Metal |Equivalence.|Metal fine in| | | | | | Fine. | | the Gulden. | +-------------+----------------+----------+-----------+---------+------------+-------------+ | | |Eng. Az. |Kar. Grein.| Az. | Guil. St. | Az. | |Dec. 14, 1489| Hungary dukaat |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 1 6 | 54.941 | | | | | | | | | |Feb. 4, 1520 | " " |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 1 18 | 37.591 | | | | | | | | | |July 11, 1548| " " |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 2 1 | 34.841 | | | | | | | | | |Feb. 7, 1573 | " " |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 2 15 | 25.972 | | | | | | | | | |Dec. 3, 1575 | " " |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 3 0 | 23.808 | | | | | | | | | |May 7 and | | | | | | | | 20, 1583 | Holland dukaat |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 3 5 | 21.976 | | | | | | | | | |Aug. 4, 1586 |Nederland dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 3 8 | 21.007 | | | | | | | | | |April 2, 1603| " " |2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 3 14 | 19.304 | | | | | | | | | |Mar. 21, 1606|Nederland rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 |190.666 | 10 2 | 18.878 | | | " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 3 16 | 18.796 | | | | | | | | | |July 6, 1610 |Nederland rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 10 12 | 17.987 | | | " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 0 | 17.856 | | | | | | | | | |Sept. 26, | " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 10 16 | 17.654 | | 1615 | " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 1 | 17.635 | | | | | | | | | |Feb. 13, 1619| " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 10 16 | 17.654 | | | " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 2 | 17.42 | | | | | | | | | |July 21, 1622| " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 11 6 | 16.873 | | | " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 5 | 16.805 | | | | | | | | | |Tolerantie, }| " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 12 0 | 15.888 | |Oct. 9, 1638}| " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 10 | 15.872 | | | | | | | | | |March 6, }| | | | | | | | 1645 and }| " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 12 12 | 15.132 | |Jan. 6, }| " dukaat|2.8-24/35 | 23 7 | 71.424 | 4 15 | 15.037 | | 1653 }| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |March 31, | | | | | | | | 1749 | " rijder| 6.16 | 22 0 | 190.666 | 14 0 | 13.619 | | | | | | | | | +-------------+----------------+----------+-----------+---------+------------+-------------+ | | | | | | | | |1806 (Louis }| | |{22 carat }| 8.4-3/4 | 10 francs | ... | | Napoleon) }| | |{ gold }| | | | | | Gold penning | 8.28-4/9 |{16 grs. }| | | | | | | |{ silver }| | | | | | | | | | | | |1816 | 10-gulden piece| 4.12 | 0.900 fine| ... | ... | ... | |1875 | " " |6-720/1000| 0.900 fine|6.048 | ... | ... | | | | grms. | |fine gold| | | +-------------+----------------+----------+-----------+---------+------------+-------------+

APPENDIX V

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF GERMANY

The German Mint system inherited from that of Charlemagne the common features noticed already in the case of Florence, the Netherlands, and other countries, namely, the division of the silver libra into 20 solidi (_schillingen_), and of the solidus into 12 denarii (_pfennige_), so that 240 denarii = 1 libra. The solidus occurs (theoretically or in accompt) in both gold and silver. The gold solidus of the German system originally weighed less than the Frankish, which was 72 to the libra, while the German was 80 to the libra.

The ratio of gold to silver was 12:1, so that theoretically 1 pound silver = 1 oz. gold = 6-2/3 gold schilling.

In actual coins, 1 gold schilling = 3 silver schillingen = 36 pfennige.

Gradually this system was superseded by that of reckoning by the mark. The particular mark which obtained widest acceptance was the Cologne mark, which was thus subdivided--

Cologne mark = 8 Oz. = 16 Loth. = 64 Quintlein. = 256 Pfennige. = 512 Heller. = 4352 Eschen or Grain.

For the purpose of standard of alloy the mark was differently subdivided. Thus--

Gold alloy weight--

1 mark = 12 carats = 288 grs. (12 x 24).

Silver alloy weight--

1 mark = 16 loth = 288 grs. (16 x 18).

Subsequently, when the gold gulden began to be minted, and to displace in reckoning the gold solidi (6-2/3 to the oz.), a third system of reckoning by gulden, schillingen, and pfennige was adopted. But long before this had become general, the downward course of the pfennige had proceeded apace.

In 1255, in Swabia, the silver mark was minted into 660 pfennige; and in 1276, in Magdeburg, the mark of silver (15 loth fine) into 528 pfennige.

Originally heller and kreutzer were only alternative forms of the pfennige, not subdivisions of it (heller = Hällische pfennige); but the irregular course of depreciation established a difference in character.[24]

In 1407, in the Bishopric of Würzburg, pfennige were minted at a tale of 400 to the mark and 6 loth fine; Heller 544 to the mark and 4 loth fine. Fifty years later, at Nürnberg, pfennige were being minted 512 to the mark and 5-1/4 loth fine (= 1560-8/21 to the mark of fine silver), and Heller at 704 to the mark and 3-1/2 loth fine (= 3218-2/7 to the mark fine).

The course of depreciation proceeded from the unregulated, irresponsible mintings of the small states, and from base financier craft. During the fourteenth century it proceeded apace, in spite of the attempts at a reform made by the Emperor Charles IV. In 1356 he prescribed the minting of the mark of silver into 31 schillingen 4 heller (or 376 hellers), but the ordinance remained ineffectual.

The depreciation against which it vainly strove was not confined to the lower species, such as pfennige and heller. The close of the thirteenth century had witnessed the introduction of a new large silver money, which for a time stood by the side of the schilling, and then gradually displaced it. The new coin--the _groschen_, minted in imitation of the gros Tournois of France--made its first appearance in Bohemia in 1296, when its tale was 63-1/2 to the mark, 15 loth fine. The same process of depreciation at once began to affect it, and during the fourteenth century the downward course of the coin was very rapid, especially in Saxony (see Tables infra., and pp. 30, 97). With the commencement of a gold coinage in the middle of the same century, a third element of confusion was introduced, and quickly the same diversity of weight, alloy, and type began to prevail as in the silver coinage (see Table of the depreciation of the gold gulden, infra., and pp. 31, 98).

The Reichstag, which met at Nürnberg in 1438, found itself driven to record, in simple terms, the right of everybody who could mint to do so according to what standard of fineness and weight he pleased, "seeing the impossibility of a common standard and weight."

The close of the century witnessed the introduction of the last of these numerous confusing elements, but one which was to become of prime importance in the history of German currency, namely, the _thaler_. In its first form it was intended as the silver equivalent of the _gold gulden_, being minted 8 to the mark (i.e. 1 oz. weight per piece), and of fine (or 16 loth) silver. It received the name _gulden groschen_ when first coined by Archduke Sigismund of Austria in 1484; but in the sixteenth century, on account of its great manufacture in Bohemia, it became known as the _Joachims thaler_ (or _Schlicken thaler_, or _Löwen thaler_). The subsequent depreciation of the thaler, which came as a matter of course, was very unequal in the different circles, being most strongly marked in Saxony.

By the first of the Imperial Mint Ordinances, which will be spoken of immediately, the weight of this piece was still retained at 1 oz., but the standard was reduced to 15 loth fine. In 1549 the Elector Maurice fixed the standard at 14 loth 8 grs. fine, while still retaining the tale of 8 to the mark.

The second Imperial Mint Ordinance of 1551 was constructed as a double basis--

1. Of the gulden groschen (i.e. thaler) = 1 gold gulden = 72 kr.

2. Of the gulden groschen (i.e. thaler) = 1 gold gulden = 60 kr.

The tale was altered from 8 to 7-1/2 to the mark, but the standard was lowered still further to 14 loth 2 grs. fine (= 8-120/254 to the mark of fine silver). But in the accompanying tariff the actual specie thaler-piece was set at 22 groschen, or 66 kreutzers.

The third Imperial Mint Ordinance established an important difference from this system. The actual thaler or silver gulden (= 72 kreutzers) was ordered to be discontinued, and no more minted, and a different basis adopted of silver Reichs guldens = 60 kreutzers, at a tale of 9-1/2 to the mark, 14 loth 16 grs. fine.

This intended exclusion of the thaler, however, proved quite ineffectual. Protestations were raised against it, and in the Reichstag at Augsburg the minting of the thaler was again authorised--8 to the mark, 14 loth 4 grs. fine.

The immediately succeeding movement of the thaler is given in the text (see Table, p. 103).

Further than, as above, it is out of the question in so brief a résumé to specify the minuter confusions and conflicting variations of the German monetary system at the opening of the sixteenth century. During the course of that century three separate attempts were made to establish an imperial system that should displace all minor ones, and thus remedy the confusion.

The first attempt was made by Charles V. in his Imperial Mint Ordinance issued at Esslingen on the 10th November 1524.

The basis of this ordinance was the mark of silver = 8 florins 10 schillings 8 heller, and the pieces ordained were--

1. A silver piece = 1 Rhenish gold gulden, 8 to the mark, 15 loth fine (see the account of the thaler above).

2. _Orth_, 32 to mark, 15 loth fine.

3. _Zähender_ = 1/10 Rhenish gold gulden, 80 to mark, 15 loth fine.

4. _Groschen_ = 1/21 Rhenish gold gulden, 12 loth fine, 136 to mark.

Besides these coins, the ordinance recognised temporarily a whole series of then-current pfennige. Thus--

Strasburg pfennige, · 126 to the gulden. Würtemberg " · 168 " Rappen " · 157-1/2 " Rhenish " · 210 " Saxon " · 252 " Räder " · 312 "

As explained in the text (p. 96), this ordinance came nowhere into observance, and twenty-nine years later Charles V. issued his second Imperial Ordinance at the Reichstag of Augsburg (1551).

The system then attempted to be instituted was based on a mark of fine silver = 10 florins 12-1/2 kreutzers but in denomination a double system was employed--

1. Gold gulden = 60 kr.

2. {Gold gulden } = 72 " {Gulden groschen}

1. The Reichs gulden (= 1 gold gulden = 72 kreutzers) was prescribed thus--7-1/2 to the mark, 14 loth 2 grs. fine (see account of thaler, _supra_).

2. The kreutzer-piece was prescribed--237 to the mark, 6 loth 1 gr. fine (= 626-3/4 to the mark of fine silver).

3. The groschen (= 1/24 Reichs gulden)--94-1/2 to the mark, 7 loth 5 grs. fine (= 207-99/131 to the mark of fine silver).

Accompanying these regulations, however, there was a tariff as before, but more comprehensive, for the temporary recognition of a miscellaneous mass of coins of the Rhine, the Netherlands, Lower Saxony, Higher Saxony, Franconia, and the mark of Brandenburg. Thus--

GROSCHEN.

Reichs groschen, at 12 pfennige, 24 = 1 gulden, at 72 kreutzers. Groschen of Misnia and Franconia, at 12 pfennige, 25-1/5 = " " Rhenish _albi_ and Netherland stuyvers, at 8 pfennige, 28 = " " Lübeck schellingen, at 12 pfennige, 28-4/5 = " " Groschen of the Mark, at 8 pfennige, 38-2/5 = " "

PFENNIGE.

Of the Tyrol, 300 = 1 gulden, at 60 kreutzers. Of Lübeck, 288 = " " Of the mark of Brandenburg, 256 = " " Of Saxony and Franconia, 252 = " " Of Austria, 4 loth fine, 649 to the mark, 240 = " " Of Bavaria, 210 = " " Of the Rhine, 186-2/3 = " " Of Swabia, 180 = " " Of Würtemberg, 168 = " " Rappen, 250 = " " Of Strasburg, 120 = " "

This ordinance obtained no more vogue than its predecessor, the main cause of its slighting being the dissatisfaction of the powers of Upper and Lower Saxony at the tariffing of the thaler, which they declared to be too low, and accordingly advanced (1555) to 24 groschen (= 32 Marien groschen = 72 kreutzers).

The third Imperial Ordinance was issued at Augsburg on the 19th August 1559. Practically the same standard and basis was maintained as in the preceding ordinance, the mark of fine silver being coined into 10 florins 13-1/2 kreutzers in the larger species.

But in the detail of these larger species an important difference was established.

The silver gulden had hitherto been equal to the gold gulden. The actual specie silver gulden in pieces of the time was nominally equivalent to 60 kreutzers. But since 1551 there had been minted a Reichs gulden in specie equal to 72 kreutzers.

In order to mark the difference it was determined to coin in future only silver gulden = 60 kreutzers, while the gold gulden was put at 75 kreutzers.

The specie authorised by this third Imperial Ordinance therefore were--

1. Gold gulden, 72 to mark, 18-1/2-carat fine, to equal 75 kreutzers.

2. Silver Reichs gulden, 9-1/2 to the mark, 14 loth 16 grs. fine, to equal 60 kreutzers.

3. Thaler, or 72 kreutzers silver gulden, to be discontinued.

4. Kreutzer, to equal 1/80 gulden, 243-1/2 to the mark, 6 loth 4 grs. fine (= 626-1/7 to the mark fine).

5. Reichs groschen, to equal 1/24 gulden, 8 loth fine, 108-1/2 to the mark; and a few other species.

The lower denominations (pfennige and heller) were minted on the basis of the mark = 11 florins 5 kreutzers.

Almost immediately, protestations were raised against this ordinance, especially by the Lower Westphalian Circle, and it remained quite inoperative. The succeeding Reichstag at Augsburg again authorised the issue of the thaler (8 to the mark, 14 loth 4 grs. fine, so that the fine mark = 10 florins 12 kreutzers).

As late as the Reichstag of Regensburg (1594) desultory attempts were made to establish a uniform system, but all practical idea of it had long ceased, and the regulation of Mint matters henceforth fell into the separate jurisdiction of the various Circles. The Lower Circles went their own way at their meetings at Cologne (1566, 1572, and 1582), as did the Upper Circles in their separate meetings in 1564 and 1572 at Nördlingen and Nürnberg.

At its meeting at Lüneburg in 1568 the Lower Saxon Circle adopted a system not far removed from that of the third Imperial Mint Ordinance of 1559. The mark of fine silver was to be coined into 10 florins 43-11/67 kreutzers, and the thaler was fixed at 24 groschen (=72 kreutzers).

Underneath this separately concerted action of the Circles, however, licence and disorder prevailed in the issue of smaller pieces of a grossly depreciated nature, before which the good heavy silver species disappeared, leaving the greatest confusion, together with a continual rise in prices or fall in the standard. The imperial proclamations of 20th January and 24th September 1571 were of no avail against this process, and by 1585 the mercantile rate had risen, thus--

Philipps thaler = 82 kr. Reichs thaler = 74 " Gulden groschen = 64 "

In 1596 the Imperial Commissioners at Frankfort provisionally recognised as a tariff--

Gold gulden = 80 kr. Reichs thaler = 72 " Gulden groschen or thaler = 64 "

But later in the same year these authorities at Strasburg set the Reichs thaler at 84 kreutzers (mark of fine silver = 12 fl. 36 kr.). As the disorder of the _Kipper und Wipper Zeit_ broke over the Empire, in consequence of the process of wilful depreciation, the Emperor made several public attempts at its arrestation by letters addressed to the various Circles separately (1601, 1603, and 1607). Meanwhile, the Reichs thaler had risen to 90 kreutzers (mark of fine silver = 13-1/2 florins).

According to this valuation the gulden of 1551 of 72 kreutzers was set at 94 kreutzers, and the gulden of 1559 of 60 kreutzers was set at 79 kreutzers.

It was on this latter basis (of the 60-kreutzer Reichs gulden of 1559 = 79 kreutzers) that was founded the later Misnian, Franconian, and Kammer-Gerichts currencies of the eighteenth century, which did not materially differ amongst themselves, thus--

Misnian gulden @ 31 groschen (= 78-2/3 kr.) Franconian gulden @ 20 batzen (= 80 kr.) Kammer-Gerichts gulden = 78 kr. 2-10/23 thalers.

In 1623 the Higher Circles adopted by their Mint determination the following system:--

Thaler = 90 kr. Gold gulden = 1 fl. 44 kr. Ducat = 2 fl. 20 "

In the smaller pieces the basis was the mark of fine silver = 16-florin = 10-2/3 thaler.

For example--

1/2-Batzen, 7 loth fine, 210 to the mark. Kreutzer, 5 " 300 " 3-Heller piece, 3-1/2 " 560 " Pfennige, 3 " 720 "

To this system the Lower Circles acceded, in the same year 1623, after an ineffectual attempt to enforce the interim standard of 1596, which had set the Reichs thaler at 21 batzen or 84 kreutzers.

From this united action of the Upper and Lower Circles Saxony stood apart, following quite a different course. While elsewhere the thaler was raised, here they lowered it to its old equivalence of 24 groschen. In actual practice, however, the step proved only half effective, as the depreciated thaler was persistently minted. There resulted accordingly, in Saxony, a double system of "good" and "bad" money, with a difference of something like 25 per cent. between them. To increase the confusion there was for a time a difference between the practice of Lower Saxony and Electoral Saxony. The former, Lower Saxony, had in 1610 adopted the following system:--

Reichs thaler = 28 groschen. Reichs gulden thaler of 1559 = 24 " Philipps thaler = 30-2/3 " Silver groschen, = 234 to the mark, 14 loth, 4 grs. fine. " schillingen, 306 " (So that the mark of fine silver = 12 fl. 9 kr.)

Finding it impossible to maintain this system, they altered it in 1617, and finally in 1622 conformed with Higher Saxony, setting the Reichs thaler at 24 silver groschens.

As settled in this and the following year, the system of Electoral and Lower Saxony was as follows:--

Reichs thaler = 24 gulden groschen. Gulden thaler of 1559 = 21 " Philipps thaler and gold gulden = 30 " Ducat = 36 "

Contemporaneously (1623), the Brandenburg system was as follows:--

Reichs thaler = 24 good groschen. Gold gulden = 27 " Ducat = 38 "

Through the remaining period of the Thirty Years' War very little is on record with regard to the German Mint system. The closing period of the strife was marked by such complaints as to excess of depreciated small specie as had prevailed in 1620, bringing with it a further enhancement of the price of the larger silver specie. In 1665, accordingly, the three Higher Circles, Franconia, Bavaria, and Swabia met together. They found on a trial that the mark of fine silver was selling commercially at from 14 florins 15 kreutzers to 14 florins 20 kreutzers, and that it was impossible to mint the larger silver specie unless the Reichs thaler were set at 96 kreutzers. This would raise the mark of fine silver to 14 florins 24 kreutzers. At the same time it was resolved to declare the ducat at 3 florins (mark of fine gold = 203 florins 49 kreutzers, 3-31/71 pfennige), the ratio being accordingly changed from 15 to 14-1/8.

In 1667 this scheme was provisionally adopted _in comitiis_. From this scheme Saxony and Brandenburg held off, maintaining that the advance of the Reichs thaler was not sufficient. They accordingly, in the same year, adopted the so-called _Zinnaische_ standard, setting the Reichs thaler at 1 florin 45 kreutzers (105 kreutzers), equal to 18 good groschens (mark of fine silver = 10-1/2 thalers, or 15 florins 45 kreutzers).

The enactment of this system gave rise to a new species of heavy silver coins:--

Guldener = 2/3 thaler. " = 60 kr. " = 16 good groschen. " = 32 schillingen.

Two years later, 1669, the three Higher Circles determined, as a measure of protection to their gold, to alter the ratio, and for that purpose to reduce the thaler from 96 to 90 kreutzers again, while leaving the ducat = 3 florins, and the gold gulden = 2 florins 20 kreutzers.

The mark of fine silver was thus = 3 fl. 30 kr. " gold " = 204 " (Ratio = 15-1/9.)

The divisional coins were to be minted on a graduated and enhanced standard. Thus--

6-kr. and 4-kr. pieces (Batzen), at 13 fl. 55 kr. to the mark fine. Groschen (3 kr.) at 14 fl. 10 " " Kreutzer at 14 fl. 40 " " Pfennige (3760 to the mark fine), at 15 fl. 43 " "

There were thus three contemporary systems in Germany in 1670--

1. Reichs thaler, at 90 kr., mark of fine silver at 13 fl. 30 kr. 2. " at 96 " " at 14 fl. 24 " 3. " at 105 " " at 15 fl. 45 "

The three Upper Circles, however, could not maintain their last enacted order. In spite of its enactment, the Reichs thaler rose again to 96 kreutzers, and the ducat to 3 florins 12 kreutzers.

The confusion and general harm which resulted has been referred to in the text (p. 199), and it is to be regarded simply as a stop-gap at any cost that the measure proposed by the Three Circles of fixing the thaler at 90 kreutzers was carried through the Reichstag of 1680.

From this system, however, the Emperor, with Bavaria and Salzburg, stood apart, putting the Reichs thaler at 96 kreutzers; and ten years later, 1690, Saxony, Brandenburg, and Brunswick and Lüneburg established again a distinct system--the well-known Leipzig standard.

By this system the Reichs thaler was set at 120 kreutzers or 2 florins (mark of fine silver = 12 thalers 18 gulden).

In a few years this valuation of the thaler prevailed all over the Empire. Sweden acceded to it in 1690, with Bremen and Pomerania, Mainz, Treves, the Palatinate, and Frankfort, and three years later the Higher Circles followed suite. Contemporaneously the gold gulden was advanced to 2 florins 56 kreutzers.

Although the Emperor subsequently joined in the recognition of the Leipzig standard, it did not remain effective in actual practice, and while no further advance of the thaler was officially recognised, the lower denominations were again depreciated by the Mint competition of the various states, 10-kreutzer pieces being minted on a standard of 20-1/3 to 21-1/3 gulden to the mark fine. In 1736 the question of a standard was again brought before the Reichstag; and on the 10th September 1738 it was resolved to adopt the Leipzig standard for the Empire, with the Reichs thaler = 2 florins, ducat = 4 florins, gold gulden = 3 florins; while, for the divisional coins, a basis of fine mark silver = 13-2/3 thaler was enacted.

This system, if it endured at all, did so only for a couple of years. The outbreak of the war of the Austrian Succession brought with it a new period of conflicting depreciations, and at the close Austria took a decisive step. Without taking any measure to secure the co-operation of the Circles, or any part of the Empire, the Emperor Francis I. adopted the 20-gulden standard (the mark of fine silver = 13-1/3 Reichs thalers = 20 guldens). It was at once adopted in Hungary and Bohemia, the territories of Maria Theresa.

Frederick Augustus, Elector of Saxony and King of Poland, was the first to adopt this Austrian standard, at Dresden in 1750, though with a very slight variation (putting the mark of fine silver at 13-3/8 Reichs thalers instead of 13-1/3). In 1753 Bavaria also acceded to the 20-gulden standard, after a brief attempt (1747-1753) at the erection of a 24-gulden standard, and in the following year the Austrian system was adopted by Brandenburg-Anspach, Bayreuth, Würzburg, and Nürnberg.

The Convention of Vienna (21st September 1753) which formally established this Austrian or Convention standard (20-gulden system), prescribed as follows:--

1. Gold--

Mark of fine gold = 283 fl. 5 kr. 4-47/74 pf. Chief coin = Reichs ducat, 67 to the mark (Cologne mark), 23 kr. 8 grs. fine (= 67-67/71 to the mark of fine gold), to = 4 fl. 10 kr.; the Holland and other ducats then current in Germany being tariffed at 4 fl. 7-1/2 kr.

2. Silver--

Mark of fine silver = 20 guldens for all manner of silver coins down to the groschen or 3-kreutzer piece (ratio of silver to gold 1:14-11/21).

The silver coins authorised were--

1. Thaler (specie or convention thaler = 2 fl.), 10 to the mark, 13-1/3 loth fine.

2. Gulden (or 1/2-specie thaler), 20 to the mark, 13-1/3 loth fine.

3. 30-kreutzer piece (1/2-gulden or 1/4-specie thaler), 40 to the mark, 13-1/3 loth fine.

4. 17-kreutzer piece, 70-10/17 to the mark, 8-2/3 loth fine (only for Austria).

5. 7-kreutzer piece, 171-3/7 to the mark, 6-13/18 loth fine (only for Austria).

6. 20-kreutzer piece, 60 to the mark, 9-1/3 loth fine.

7. 10-kreutzer piece, 120 to the mark, 8 loth fine.

8. Groschen or 3-kreutzer piece, 400 to the mark, 5-1/2 loth fine.

For the lowest denomination of divisional coins, half-groschen, kreutzer, and pfennige, quite varying standards were permitted, according to the piece or locality, namely, from 20-3/4 to 33 guldens to the Koln mark.

For tolerated coin the following tariff was fixed:--

GOLD

Bavarian maxd'or and double gold gulden = 6 fl. 8 kr. Bavarian carolus or 3-gold gulden piece = 9 fl. 12 kr. Kremnitz ducat } Florentine gigliati} = 4 fl. 12 kr. Venetian zecchino }

All other gold coins to be taken as bullion at a value of 280 fl. for the Cologne mark of fine gold. All silver species of other states below the value of 1/2 florin forbidden.

Such was the Convention System or Standard, which, by the accession of the Electoral Palatinate, and of Salzburg might be practically regarded as the Imperial system.

This Convention system, and these Convention or specie thaler and other coins, remained the Mint system of Austria until modern times.

The changes which were made in the Austrian system by the Vienna Convention of 1857 have been already detailed (see text, pp. 209-12).

Ten years later Austria withdrew from this monetary treaty (in accordance with the terms of the treaty of Berlin, 13th June 1867), with the intention of acceding to the contemplated French currency treaty of 31st July 1867. She ceased the coining of German gold crowns and half-crowns, and instead minted 4 and 1-ducat pieces. From 1870 onwards she coined, in conjunction with Hungary, 8 and 4-florin gold pieces, the former 77-1/2 to the pound, .900 fine.

By a decree of 6th November 1870, the 8-florin gold piece was tariffed at 8.10 florin. At this it was made legal tender, on the basis of the French ratio of 15-1/2; but it was practically nothing more than commercial money, like the preceding _crowns_ and _half-crowns_ of the convention of 1857. The standard of Austria remained nominally the silver florin of the convention of 1857, although in actual practice the currency was paper. In March 1879 the Austrian and Hungarian Mints were closed to the coinage of silver on private account, preparatory to a reorganisation of the Austrian monetary system on a gold basis. This reform was decided on in 1892, and briefly prescribed as follows:--

The monetary unit is the krone or crown = 2 florins; but to be minted in 10 and 20-crown pieces, 1 kilogramme pure gold = 3280 crowns, .900 fine. The crown is divided into 100 hellers.

For the purpose of basing the new system on gold, a ratio between the old silver and the new gold standard of 1:18.22 was adopted, the existing florin being declared = 2 francs 10 cents.

Silver is fractional money only, the old florins passing as 2 crowns.

South Germany.

From the Convention or 20-gulden system (the old Austrian system) sprang the accompanying system, the 24-gulden standard, which was nothing but the 20-gulden or Austrian standard under another name. Very soon after the establishment of the Convention standard, the Elector of Bavaria perceived or concluded that the continuance of that standard in his dominions would produce disorders so long as the other circles did not accede to the convention. He accordingly arrested the execution of the convention in his territories, and adopted a provisional arrangement. At the end, however, of a long correspondence with the Austrian state (Maria Theresa), an agreement was made that he should conform his coins in standard and weight to the convention system, but should be permitted to tariff them at one-fifth higher rate, putting i.e. the specie thaler not at 2 florins but at 2 florins 24 kr., and so on (the mark of silver being consequently worth 24 guldens, instead of, as in the Austrian or Convention system, 20 guldens).

This was the origin of the 24-gulden standard, which gradually spread over the whole of South Germany, with the exception of Austria. The three Upper Circles acceded in 1761, Salzburg in 1765, and in the following year the Rhenish powers, Mainz, Treves, the Palatinate, Hesse-Darmstadt, and Frankfort.

From this 24-gulden standard sprang towards the close of the eighteenth century a later development, due to the circulation of the kronen thaler or Brabant thaler, which, from 1755 onwards, Austria minted for her Netherland possessions. The Rhenish provinces drove this piece above its Mint rate, setting it at 2 florins 42 kreutzers, although in the 24-gulden standard its value was only 2 florins 38-10/19 kreutzers. This implied a standard of 24-6/11 guldens to the mark of fine silver, and gradually, about the beginning of the present century, Bavaria, Würtemberg, and Nassau minted convention thalers on the same footing. Baden, Hesse, and Saxe-Coburg followed suit in their minting of kronen thalers until, by the Mint Convention of the South German states in 1837, the new standard (the 24-1/2-gulden standard) was formally recognised as the South German standard. In this convention Austria had no part.

The standard here detailed, the 24-1/2-gulden or South German standard, was assimilated to the Prussian system in the Dresden Convention, 1838 (see text, p. 205), and in that connection remained intact until the developments of modern times detailed in the text, p. 215.

Prussia.

The Prussian monetary system, as a separate identity, took its rise in that same period which witnessed the independent action of Austria, above detailed. Its builder was Frederick the Great, who, for this purpose, called in the advice of a Dutch merchant, Philip Graumann. It is to this latter that is due the introduction in 1750 of the 21-gulden or 14-thaler standard, otherwise known as the Graumann standard.

Thaler = 10-1/2 to the mark, 12 loth fine (mark of fine silver therefore = 14 thalers or 21 guldens).

Thaler = 24 groschens = 288 pfennige (24 × 12).

Groschen and 1/2-groschen minted as divisional coins (= 1/24 and 1/48 thaler) of billon.

After the temporary debasement during the Seven Years' War, the Graumann standard was re-established in 1764, but with two differences.

1. The minting of 1/2 and 1/4-thaler pieces of 12 loth silver was ordered to cease from 1766, and to be replaced from 1764 by--

1/3 thaler, 10-2/3 loth, 28 to the mark } 1/6 " 8-1/3 " 43-3/4 " } 14-thaler standard. 1/12 " 6 " 63 " }

2. The billon divisional money (minted primarily for the Provincial States of Prussia) was greatly increased in the amount of its issue, but depreciated in standard on a varying scale according to the districts intended, Silesia, Cleves, etc., reaching in some cases even to an 18-thaler standard. Up to 1772 there was issued in these depreciated single and double-groschen pieces an amount equal to 8,979,189 thalers. Subsequently, the standard of divisional money was reduced to 21 thalers, and at this rate, up to the death of Frederick in 1786, there were issued in 6-pfennige and other pieces 12,586,863 thalers' worth. From this time onward, up to the decrying of this depreciated divisional money at the peace of Tilsit, there was minted a matter of 29,628,807 thaler worth.

The total, therefore, was 42,215,670 thalers; the pure silver content of which was only 28,243,780 thalers.

By the publicandum of 4th May 1808, and the edict of 13th December 1811, the value of this mass was reduced, the coins being set at from two-thirds to four-sevenths of their normal value, so that--

42 groschens } } = 1 good thaler. 52-1/2 " (Bohemia) }

but it was not till the law of 30th September 1821 that a recoinage could be accomplished.

The provisions of this law of 1821 were as follows:--

1. Gold--

Friedrichs d'or as hitherto, viz. 35 to the mark = 5 thalers.

4. Silver--

Prussian thaler as before, 10-1/2 to the mark gross (= 14 to the mark fine).

7. Thaler to be subdivided into 30 groschens 12 pfennige; the latter tenderable only up to 1/6 thaler.

8. Silver groschen = 106-2/3 to the mark, 2/9 silver (= 16 thalers to the mark fine).

By the law of 1821, this standard came into operation in 1626, and it remained the standard for Prussia and her provinces until the developments in modern times, specified in the text, p. 215.

At the convention of Dresden, 30th July 1838, the Prussian 14-thaler or 21-gulden standard was adopted, along with the South German or 24-1/2-gulden standard as the standard of the German Zollverein.

Subsequent to that date the Prussian system was adopted by Hanover, Brunswick, Oldenburg, Mecklenburg, Waldeck, Lippe, etc.

PRUSSIAN MINTINGS FROM THE REFORM OF 1809 TO THE END OF 1836.

Thaler pieces 70,850,560 1/6 " " 16,942,307 ---------- 87,792,867 Full-weighted silver previously in currency 95,709,282 ----------- Total of full-weighted silver 183,502,149 ===========

One-third pieces, minted 1809-11 237,151 Billon divisional money, minted 1821-36 2,949,760 ----------- Thalers 186,689,060

Withdrawn since 1809-36--

1/5-thaler pieces 319,522 thalers 1/12 " " 135,504 " 1/15 " " 428,256 " ------- 883,282 ----------- 185,805,778 ===========

The gold coinage had, in Prussia, little relativity to the silver.

From 1750 this state minted double, single, and half-pistoles, under the name, Friedrichs d'or, on the basis of 35 to the mark, 21-3/4 carats fine, for the single piece.

From 1770 the standard was lowered to 21-2/3 carats, and at this it was confirmed by the law of September 1821.

The ascertained mintings of these were as follows:--

1764-86 29,599,482-1/2 thalers. 1787-1808 26,515,490 " 1809-36 13,922,960 "

But long before 1840 almost the whole of this amount had disappeared or been melted down.

In state payments the Friedrich d'or was taken at 5 thalers, but in ordinary commerce up to 1783 they were taken at 5-1/4 thalers, a tariff which gradually rose to 5-1/3 and 5-1/2 thalers. The purchases of gold which the Bank of England made in 1816, in order to its resumption of cash payments, drove the pistole or Friedrich d'or up to 5-3/4 thalers, and it was not for ten years that it fell back to 5-2/3 thalers.

Although paid by Government at this latter, and so continued till the Mint Convention of 1853, it was only as a mercantile commodity. The only legal standard and tender in Prussia was silver (the silver thaler), to which gold was varyingly ratable, according to market fluctuations.

The Prussian system thus described remained in force until the Vienna coinage treaty of 24th January 1857, the details of which have been already stated in the text. The resolutions of that treaty were adopted by the Prussian Mint law of 4th May 1857, as follows:--

1. The Prussian pound of 500 grms., decimally divided, is substituted for the previous standard of 233.865 grms.

2-6. The thaler continues the regular silver coin of the country--

Thirty thalers to the pound of pure silver, .900 fine.

Thus the 30-thaler standard to take the place of the old 14-thaler standard, but the two to be treated as the same.

The thaler to be coinable as a convention thaler or Vereins thaler; thaler to be subdivided into 30 groschens, at 12 pfennige.

7-8. Divisional coin limited in tender to 1/6 thaler as before, and both minted on a 34-1/2-thaler standard.

11. Gold commercial coins shall be coined under the names of "crown" and "half-crown," in the form and with the attribution of confederation coins, viz.--

1. Crown, 1/50 of a pound of fine gold (.900 fine). 2. Half-crown, 1/100 " "

These coins shall be the special gold coins of the country, and other gold pieces shall not henceforth be coined.

14. The silver value of the gold coinage shall be entirely fixed by the relation of the supply to the demand, and no one is bound to take gold in the place of the legal silver value of the country.

16. Our Finance Minister is empowered to settle the price at which the crown and the half-crown shall be taken into our pay offices.

The established rate, as well as the permission to receive crowns and half-crowns instead of silver coins in our offices, may at any time be revoked or restricted by the publication of a proclamation by our Finance Minister.

19. Our Minister of State is also authorised to fix the value above which foreign gold and silver coins must not be offered or given in payment in ordinary transactions.

The subsequent course of events and the existing Prussian (Imperial German) system have been already specified (see text, p. 215).

Hamburg.

The origin of the common Mint standard of Lübeck and Hamburg was the division of the mark into 16 schillingen, and each schilling into 12 pfennige. The metal mark and the Mint mark soon parted company, and by the time of the treaty of 1255 the two states agreed to mint the mark of fine silver into 38 schillingen 10 pfennige (= 2 marks 6 schillingen 10 pfennige).

The Wendish standard was established by the adoption in 1325 of the Hamburg-Lübeck treaty by Wismar and Lüneburg.

In 1433 this Wendish standard adopted the Cologne mark as its weight basis.

COURSE OF DEPRECIATION OF THE STANDARD.

Mks. Sch. Pf. 1226--The mark of fine silver coined into 2 2 0 1255 " " " 2 9 5 1293 " " " 2 9 8 1305 " " " 2 15 5 1325 " " " 3 0 9 1353 " " " 3 10 11 1375 " " " 4 3 0 1398 " " " 4 15 2 1403 " " " 5 1 11 1411 " " " 5 12 5 1430 " " " 8 8 0 1450 " " " 9 12 2 1461 " " " 11 8 10 1506 " " " 12 8 0

The Mint Union of the Wendish states continued until the beginning of the seventeenth century, when it expired unperceived. The experience of Hamburg in the _Kipper und Wipper Zeit_, with its resultant establishment of the Hamburg Bank, has been already referred to.

In 1667 Hamburg freely joined the _Zinnaische_ standard, according to which the mark of fine silver was coined into 10-1/2 thalers (= 31 marks 8 schillingen, _Hamburger courant_). She, however, hesitated to follow the German system in its change over to the Leipzig standard in 1690, and after an interim period of weltering disorder, during which the standard varied from 30 marks to 34 marks 8 schillingen per mark fine of silver, the State adopted in 1725 the so-called Lübeck standard (1 mark fine = 34 marks), as the Hamburger courant.

This standard had existed in Holstein from 1693. In 1788 and 1789 long and serious debates were held in Hamburg on the question of the substitution of a lighter (or lower) standard. And seventy years later a change in such direction had practically effected itself, although not legislatively recognised. By 1850 the actual currency of the state consisted mostly of silver coins of the Prussian (or 14-thaler) standard, circulating at an equivalence of 1 thaler = 2-1/2 marks Hamburger courant (= 40 schillingen), an equivalence implying a standard of 35 marks courant to the mark of fine silver.

Legally, however, the 34-marks standard remained in force until the coalescence of the free state of Hamburg with the new imperial German system in our own days.

The question of the agio of the _Hamburg banco_ system belongs rather to the history of banking.

German Standards: Silver.

In brief résumé, the historic standards of the German monetary system have been as follows:--Nos. 4, 5, 7, 9, 11, 12, 13 representing the systems in existence at the time of the projection of the great currency reform of 1871:--

1. Old imperial standard of 1559, based on the Reichs Münz ordnung of Ferdinand I., mark of fine silver = 8 thalers. Altered in 1622, so that 9 thalers 2 grs. = 1 mark fine silver.

2. The _Zinnaische_ standard, agreed upon by Saxony and Brandenburg at Zinna, 1667, 1 mark fine silver = 10-1/2 thaler = 15-3/4 guldens.

3. Leipzig standard or Torgau standard (see text, p. 200), mark fine silver = 18 gulden.

4. The Prussian standard, 14 thalers or 21 guldens = 1 mark fine silver (see above, p. 379).

5. Convention standard or Austrian standard, mark fine silver = 20 gulden (see above, p. 375).

6. The 24-gulden standard or new imperial standard of 1766 (see above, p. 377), 1 mark fine silver = 24 guldens.

7. The 24-1/2, or South German standard (see above, p. 378), 1 mark fine silver = 24-1/2 guldens.

8. The kronen-thaler standard, existing more or less between 1808 and 1837 in such of the states of the South as had adopted the minting of the Brabant or crown thaler-piece, 9.18 to a mark fine, and issued at 2 guldens 42 kreutzers, representing a 24-4/5-gulden standard. It was this system which called into being the 24-1/2-gulden standard, by the evolution of which it was itself completely superseded.

9. Wechselzahlung, or Wechselgeld, the bank reckoning system of Frankfort-on-the-Maine, 20-4/55 guldens = 13-21/55 thalers = 1 mark fine silver. The standard was, therefore, 4/11 lighter than the 20-gulden or convention standard.

10. The Augsburg girogeld, a system which existed till 1st July 1845, and in which the exchange with Amsterdam and Hamburg was expressed. Mark of fine silver = 15-95/127 gulden giro (100 gulden giro = 127 gulden of the convention standard). This system was displaced by the introduction of the 24-1/2-gulden standard.

11. The Lübeck courant (or Hamburg courant, as described above), the mark of fine silver = 11-1/3 thaler, or 34 marks.

12. Hamburg banco, the system of reckoning of the Hamburg Bank. From 1790 the bank reckoned the mark of fine silver = 9-5/24 thaler-banco, or 27-5/8 mark-banco. The issue rate was, however, 9-1/4 thaler, or 27-3/4 mark-banco, the slight premium simply covering the expenses of the bank. In 1846 this difference was abolished, the mark of fine silver both for receipt and disbursement being reckoned at 27-3/4 marks (27 marks 12 schillings). The Hamburg banco was, therefore, appreciated above the Hamburg courant by a matter of 22.5225 per cent.

13. The Schleswig-Holstein courant, mark of fine silver = 11-9/16 thaler, or 34-11/16 marks.

Gold Standards.

1. Imperial or ducat standard. The Imperial Mint Ordinance of 1559 contains the first mention of the ducat in German legislation, prescribing it 67 to the mark, 23-1/2-carat fine. Subsequently the standard varied slightly. Austria minted them 23 carat 8 grs. for herself (_kaiserlichen_), at 23 carat 9 grs. for Hungary (_kremnitzer_). The other German states approximated between a 23-carat 6 grs. and a 23-carat 8 grs. standard. Baden struck ducats 22 carat 6 grs. fine, 63.697 to the mark.

2. The _Pistole_ standard (_Friedrichs d'or_, _August d'or_, _Wilhelms d'or_, _Carls d'or_, or generally, _Louis d'or_), mostly in the Northern States of Denmark, mostly 35-1/6 to the mark, 21-1/2 carats fine, though with considerable variations (e.g. the Saxon _august d'or_, 35 to the mark, 21 carats 8 grs. fine. In Bremen this was the legal currency, the _louis d'or_ being taken at 5 thalers at 72 groot, each groot at 5 schwaren). For a considerable period, far into the present century, the merchants of Mecklenburg, Hanover, and Brunswick kept their accounts in gold pistoles (= 5 thalers). Prussia (as above, p. 382) fixed the pistole at 5-2/3 thalers, but elsewhere it had a varying (mercantile) equivalence.

3. The gold gulden standard. The last of the three Imperial Mint Ordinances (1559) prescribed gold gulden 72 to the mark, 18-1/2 carat fine. They continued to be coined in Southern German states and in Hanover up to the middle of the eighteenth century.

TABLE OF THE GOLD COINS OF GERMANY--GULDEN, DUCAT, AND FRIEDRICHS D'OR.

+--------------------+---------+---------------------+---------------------+ | | Tale | | Value of the Piece | | | to the | | as expressed in | | Year. | Cologne | Standard. | Coin of the | | | Mark. | | 20-Florin Standard. | +--------------------+---------+---------------------+---------------------+ | | | Kar. Grs. | Fl. Kr. Pfge. | |1252-- | | | | | Florentine florin | | | | | or gold gulden | | | | | (64 to the | | | | | Florence mark) | 44-3/8 | 24 0 | 6 22 3-405/2911 | | | | | | |1371-- | | | | | Gold gulden of | | | | | Cune, Archbishop | | | | | of Treves, | | | | | Wenceslaus of | | | | | Bohemia | 66 | 23 0 | 4 6 2-434/781 | | | |(and 1 0 of silver)| | | | | | | |1386 and 1399-- | | | | | Gold gulden of the | | | | | Rhenish Princes. | | | | | Adopted by Rupert | | | | | II. in 1402 | 66 | 22 6 | 4 1 1-85/781 | | | |(and 1 6 of silver)| | |1409-- | | | | | The gulden of the | | | | | three Spiritual | | | | | Electors (adopted | | | | | in the same year | | | | | by the Netherlands| | | | | at Speyer, and by | | | | | the States of the | | | | | Empire at Cologne)| 66 | 22 0 | 3 55 3-517/721 | | | | | | |1419-- | | | | | Gold Gulden of | | | | | Elector Frederick | | | | | of Brandenburg (66| | | | | to the Nürnberg | | | | | mark) | 64-1/2 | 19 0 | 3 28 1-2851/3053 | | | | | | |1422-- | | | | | Gold gulden of | | | | | King Sigismund (68| | | | | to the Nürnberg | | | | | mark) | 66-1/2 | 22 6 | 3 59 1-8049/3052 | | | | | | |1428 and 1429-- | | | | | Gold gulden of | | | | | Emperor Sigismund | | | | | (confirmed at | | | | | Frankfort and | | | | | Nürnberg, 1433, | | | | | 1438, and 1442) | 68 | 19 0 | 3 17 3-18/1207 | | | | | | |1438-- | | | | | Gold gulden of the | | | | | Elector of Mainz, | 67 | 19 0 | 3 20 2-3886/4757 | | | | | | |1442-- | | | | | Gold gulden of | | | | | Emperor Frederick | | | | | IV. | 72 | 19 0 | 3 6 3-14/213 | | | | | | |1477-- | | | | | Gold gulden as | | | | | adopted by | | | | | agreement of | | | | | several Electoral | | | | | Princes at | {68-2/3 | 19 0 | 3 15 3-2421/7313 | | Frankfort | {69-1/3 | 18 10 | 3 12 0-3669/3692 | | | | | | |1495 and 1497-- | | | | | Gold gulden as | | | | | adopted at Worms, | | | | | and in 1498 at | | | | | Lindau and | | | | | Freiburg | 71-1/3 | 18 6 | 3 3 2-3104/15194| | | | | | |1506-- | | | | | Gold gulden as by | | | | | treaty between | | | | | Bamberg, Würzburg,| | | | | and Brandenburg | 71-1/3 | 18 6 | 3 6 0-132/7597 | | | |(and 3 6 of silver)| | | | | | | |1509-- | | | | | Gold gulden | | | | | adopted by the | | | | | Reichstag at | | | | | Frankfort | 71-1/3 | 18 6 | 3 6 1-3185/7597 | | | |(and 4 0 of silver)| | | | | | | |1524-- | | | | | Gold gulden as | | | | | determined by the | | | | | Imperial Mint | | | | | Ordinance of | | | | | Charles V. at | | | | | Esslingen | 89 | 22 0 | 2 54 3-5019/6319 | | | | | | |1551-- | | | | | Gold gulden as | | | | | determined by the | | | | | Imperial Mint | | | | | Ordinance of | | | | | Charles V. at | | | | | Augsburg | 71-1/3 | 18 6 | 3 6 0-3682/7597 | | | |(and 3 8 of silver)| | | | | | | |1559-- | | | | | Gold gulden as | | | | | determined by the | | | | | Imperial Mint | | | | | Ordinance of | | | | | Ferdinand I. | 72 | 18 6 | 3 4 1-2267/3834 | | | |(and 3 8 of silver)| | | | | | | |Gold ducat (ibid.) | 67 | 23-2/3 | (10 = 1 fl. 44 kr.) | +--------------------+---------+---------------------+---------------------+

TABLE OF THE GOLD GULDEN AND DUCAT--_continued._

From 1559 the Tale and Standard remained legally unaltered; the only variations being thenceforward in equivalence or tariff, thus--

Fair of 1585 Set the Rhenish gold gulden and Philipps thaler at 82 kr. 1596 Imperial Commissioners at Frankfort set the gold gulden at 80 kr. About 1600 Gulden of 1551, of 72 kr., set at 94 kr. " " 1559, " 60 " " 79 " 1602, April 10 Brandenburg ducat set at 2 fl. " Philipps thaler and Reichs gold gulden set at 20 batzen. {Franconia} 1601 and 1602 {Bavaria } ducat, 67 to Cologne mark, 23 carats 8 grs. {Swabia } 1604 _Ibid._ (_Münz Probations Tag_), gold gulden, 72 to Cologne mark, 18 carats 6 grs. fine. 1623, July 31 Mint Edict of John George, Duke of Saxony, Rhenish gold gulden set at 1 gulden 6 good groschen. 1623 Higher Circles gold gulden = 1 fl. 44 kr. " " ducat = 2 " 20 " " August 23 Würtemberg gold gulden = 1 fl. 44 kr. " " " ducat = 2 " 20 " " " 29 Archduke Leopold of Austria set the gold gulden at 1 fl. 52 kr. " " " " " ducat 2 " 30 " " October 19 Strasburg gold gulden = 1 fl. 52 kr. " " " ducat = 2 " 30" " Electoral Saxony, Philipps or gold gulden = 30 groschen. " " ducat = 36 " " Brandenburg gold gulden = 27 groschen. " " ducat = 38 " " October 23 Frankfort gold gulden = 1 fl. 44 kr. " " " ducat = 2 " 24" " Lower Saxony gold gulden = 26-2/3 groschen (= 1 fl. 40 kr.). 1624 Three Circles (Franconia, Bavaria, Swabia) gold gulden = 1 fl. 50 kr. " " " " ducat = 2 " 30" 1637 " " " gold gulden tolerated at 2 fl. " " " " ducat " 3 " (But to be reduced respectively to 1-1/2 fl. and 2 fl. 24 kr.) 1659 Three Circles gold gulden = 2 fl. 10 kr. " " ducat = 3 " 1665 " (Franconia, Bavaria, Swabia) ducat = 3 fl. 1669 Three Circles ducat = 3 fl. " " gold gulden = 2 fl. 20 kr. 1690 In consequence of Leipzig standard, gold gulden = 2 fl. 56 kr. " " " " ducat = 4 fl. 1695 Austrian ducat = 4 fl. 1736} " gold gulden = 3 " 1738} " ducat = 4 " (but circulating at 4 fl. 15 kr.). 1748 " ducat = 4 fl. 10 kr. 1751, May 2 " Imperial ducat = 4 fl. 10 kr. " " " Kremnitz " = 4 " 12 " " " " Other " = 4 " 7-1/2 " 1771, March 23, Austria (Imperial Patent) Kremnitz ducat = 4 gulden 18 kr. " " Imperial, Bavaria, Salzburg " = 4 " 16 " " " Holland and others " = 4 " 14 " 1783, Sept. 1, Kremnitz ducat and zecchini = 4 " 22 " " " Imperial " = 4 " 20 " " " Holland " = 4 " 18 " 1786, Jan. 12, Imperial ducat = 4 " 30 " " " Kremnitz Bavarian Salzburg " = 4 " 20 " " " Holland " = 4 " 18 " (This equivalence of 4 fl. 30 kr. remained till the Vienna Convention (at 67 to the Koln mark, 23-2/3 fine = 4-1/2 gulden, ratio = 1:15-102/355 (15.2873)), the ratio prescribed by the Edict of the Emperor Joseph II., of 12th January 1786.) 1756 Souverain, or souverain d'or (originally Netherlands), minted in Vienna Mint, 22 carat 3/4 gr., 42.091 to mark gross (45.874 fine) = 6 gulden 11 kr. 1 pf. 1786, Jan. 12, Souverain, or souverain d'or = 6 gulden, 40 kr. (makes a ratio of 15.2923). 1750 Prussian Friedrichs d'or, 35 to mark, 21-3/4 carat fine (= 261 grs. of fine gold to the piece). 1770 Prussian Friedrichs d'or, 35 to mark, 21-2/3 carat fine (= 260 grs. fine gold to the piece). (Confirmed by law of 30th Sept. 1821.) 1857 Vienna Convention trade money (see p. 210). 1871 10-mark piece, 139-1/2 to the German pound, .900 fine.

TABLE OF THE THALER.

1555, Brunswick, Luneberg, Hanover, etc.--Thaler = 32 Marien groschen = 24 silver groschen.

1558, Saxony Mint Ordinance (renewing previous ordinances in spite of the Imperial Ordinance)--Thaler or gulden thaler, 14 loth 8 grs. fine, 8 to mark (= 8-56/65 to mark fine) = to 24 groschen: mark fine therefore equal to 10 fl. 38 kr.

1559, Imperial Ordinance--forbidden.

1566, Reichstag of Augsburg--again authorised; 14 loth 4 grs., 8 to the mark fine; equal 72 kr.; mark fine therefore = 9 thalers 68 kr. (10 fl. 12 kr.).

1585, Frankfort Fair--Philipps thaler = 82 kr.

1596, Imperial Commissioners at Frankfort--Philipps thaler provisionally set at 72 kr.

Same year, December 1596, Imperial Commissioners at Strasburg--Reichs thaler = 84 kr. (or 21 batzen), according to which mark of fine silver = 12 fl. 36 kr.

Beginning of seventeenth century (Imperial letters)--Reichs thaler recognised at 90 kr. as highest limit.

1603 (Higher Circles)--Reichs thaler recognised at 90 kr.

Electoral Saxony--Reichs thaler = 24 good groschen.

1610, Lower Saxony--Reichs thaler = 28 good groschen; Philipps thaler, 30-1/3 good groschen (mark fine silver = 12 fl. 9 kr.).

1617, Lower Saxony--Reichs thaler = 30 silver groschen.

1665 (Three Circles, 1667 _in comitiis_)--Reichs thaler = 96 kr. (fine mark = 14 fl. 24 kr.).

1667, Saxony and Brandenburg (Zinnaische Fuss)--Reichs thaler = 1 fl. 45 kr. = 28 good groschen (fine mark = 15-3/4 fl.).

1669 (Three Circles)--Reichs thaler reduced to 90 kr. (fine mark = 13 fl. 30 kr.).

1680 (the Three Circles carried it _in comitiis_)--Reichs thaler reduced to 90 kr. (fine mark = 13 fl. 30 kr.).

1681, Emperor at Salzburg set the Reichs thaler = 96 kr.

1690 (Leipzig Mint, for Saxony, Brandenburg, Brunswick, Luneburg)--Mark fine = 12 thalers = 18 fl.; Reichs thaler = 2 fl. (120 kr.).

1691, rejected by Hamburg, Lübeck, and Bremen, who stuck to Reichs thaler = 24 groschen, or 48 schillingen, or 90 kreutzers, or 3 marks (to be reduced to this by three drops).

1750, Prussia--Frederick V. 14-thaler, or 21-gulden fuss (14 thalers to the mark fine), thaler = 24 groschen, 1 groschen = 12 pfennige.

1821, Thaler = 30 groschen.

1857, " = 30 to the pound of pure silver, .900 fine.

1871, " = 3 marks (see p. 216).

TABLE OF THE GROSCHEN.

+---------------------------------+---------------+---------------+ | | Tale to the | Standard. | | | Cologne Mark. | | +---------------------------------+---------------+---------------+ | | | Loth. Grs. | |1226-- | | | | The Gros Tournois minted at | | | | Tours in France (58 to the | | | | troy mark) | 55-1/10 | 15 6 | | | | | |1296-- | | | | Groschen of Bohemia and Meissen | 63-1/2 | 15 0 | | | | | |1324-- | | | | Groschen of Meissen | 64-1/2 | 15 0 | | | | | |1341-- | | | | Groschen of Bohemia | 78 | 10 0 | | | | | |1350-- | | | | Meissen | 91 | 14 0 | | | | | |1364-- | | | | Bohemia | 74-1/2 | 9 0 | | | | | |1378-- | | | | Bohemian groschen, as by the | | | | Constitution of Charles IV. | | | | and Wenceslaus | 70 | 14 1 | | | | | |1380-- | | | | Meissen | 72 | 13 0 | | | | | |1407-- | | | | Würzburg (74 to the Würzburg | | | | mark) | 72-40/131 | 8 0 | | | | | |1444-- | | | | Saxony and Meissen | 88 | 7 13 | | | | | |1444-- | {160 | 16 0 | | Frederick II. of Saxony (four | {120 | 12 0 | | kinds of groschen) | {104 | 8 0 | | | | | |1484-- | | | | Archduke Sigismund of Austria | | | | (8 gulden groschen to the | | | | Vienna mark) | 6-206/307 | 16 0 | | | | | |1490-- | | | | Schwart groschen | 103 | 5 0 | | Large groschen of Hesse | 112 | 6 0 | | Hamburg | 104 | 9 15 | | Lübeck | 107 | 9 13 | | Bohemia | 84 | 6 12 | | (18 other species concurrent.) | | | | | | | |1524-- | | | | Imperial Mint Ordinance of | | | | Charles V. | 136 | 12 0 | | | | | |1551-- | | | | Imperial Mint Ordinance of | | | | Charles V. (16 contemporary | { 94-1/2 | 7 5 | | species.) | {100 | 7 6 | | | | | |1559-- | | | | Imperial Mint Ordinance of | | | | Ferdinand I.--Reichs groschen | 108-1/2 | 8 0 | | | | | |1572-- | | | | Lower Saxony--Silver groschen | 108-1/2 | 8 0 | | " Marien groschen | 155-1/2 | 7 11 | | | | | |1573-- | | | | Brandenburg | 108 | 8 3-1/2| | | | | |1610-- | | | | Lower Saxony | 116 | 14 4 | | | | | |1617-- | | | | Lower Saxony | 144 | 8 0 | | | | | |1622-- | | | | Higher and Lower Saxony | 108-1/2 | 8 0 | | | | | |1667-- | | | | Brunswick and Luneberg-- | | | | Good groschen | 160 | 10 0 | | Marien groschen | 192 | 8 0 | | | | | |1669-- | | | | The Three Circles (Franconia, | | | | Bavaria, and Swabia) | 141-2/3 | 8 0 | | | | | |1680-- | | | | The Three Circles (Franconia, | | | | Bavaria, and Swabia) | 141 | 8 0 | | | | | |1690-- | | | | Leipzig standard--Good groschen | 150 | 8 0 | | " Marien groschen | 162-1/2 | 5 14 | | | | | |1738-- | | | | As adopted _in comitiis_-- | | | | Groschen | 125 | 6 2 | | Imperial groschen | 134-49/64 | 5 13-1/4| | Marien groschen | 171 | 6 0 | +---------------------------------+---------------+---------------+

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 24: Heller were first minted in 1228 at Halle, but by the year 1420 they had sunk to the equivalence of a half-pfennige. Of the origin of the kreutzer less is known, as few, if any, records of it occur before its minting in the Tyrol in 1490. Its subsequent variation in different parts of Germany, and at different times, it is almost impossible to give account of.]

APPENDIX VI

THE MONETARY SYSTEM OF FRANCE

The metric system on which the French Mint was worked throughout the period treated of in this work up to the Revolution was as follows:--

1 mark = 8 oz. " = 64 gros. (8 × 8). " = 192 dens. (64 × 3). " = 4608 grs. (192 × 24).

An alternative subdivision of the ounce was as follows:--

1 oz. = 20 esterlings. " = 320 mailles (20 × 16). " = 640 felins (320 × 2).

For the alloy or standard the mark was thus subdivided:--

For gold mark = 24 carats each subdivided into 32 parts. " silver " = 12 dens. each subdivided into 24 grms.

In France fine gold was only refined to 23-26/32 carats, and fine silver 11 deniers 18 grs. In calculation the absolute fineness of 24 carats and 12 deniers must be used.

The system of reckoning was as follows:--

1 livre = 20 sols. 1 sol. = 12 den. 1 den. = 2 oboles. 1 obole = 2 pites. 1 pite = 2 semipites.

The reckoning by livres, sols., deniers was derived from the Frankish kings. For a time the system of reckoning by the mark threatened to replace it, but in 1313 it was again authorised by Philippe le Bel.

The origin of the difference between the livres Tournois and the livres Parisis is to be sought in the feudal Mint franchises of the barons. At one time there was a difference between the two systems of 25 per cent., the barons who had the right of minting preferring to do so at Tours, or according to the Tours weight, which was the more depreciated of the two, while at Paris the French kings attempted to keep up a tradition of a better weight standard.[25]

The distinction of livres Tournois and livres Parisis was maintained until the days of Louis XIV., when (1667) it was abolished, and the reckoning by a single livre, sol., denier, was established. (For the intermediate experiment of Henry III. see text p. 87.)[26]

The monetary system of Charlemagne was the precursor and source of the chief currency systems of mediæval and modern Europe, with the exception of Spain. It was itself an imitation of the system of the Eastern Empire.

Its basis was the _libra_ or pound, which occurs in two forms--(1) the gold pound, (2) the silver pound. Under the first race of the French kings the monetary divisions of the former were--

1. The gold solidus, a name which gave birth to the Spanish and Italian soldo and the French sol. (_sou_).

2. The third of the gold solidus (Triens or Tremissis).

Of the latter the aliquot parts were--

1. The silver solidus. 2. 1/3 " (Tremissis). 3. The denarius.

1 gold solidus = 3-1/3 silver solidi = 40 denarii. 1 " = 12 "

Under the system of the Eastern Empire the gold solidus had weighed 85-1/3 grs. and under the Merovingian Kings 70-1/2 grs. Under the rule of the Second House a considerable alteration took place. Charlemagne adopted for the basis of his system the East Frank or Rhenish libra, which was one-fourth heavier than the Roman libra adopted by the Merovings. His denarius accordingly weighed 32 grs. If ideally constructed the system, as far as silver is concerned, would be this--

12 denarii = 1 solidus. 20 solidi = 1 libra. 32 × 20 × 12 = 7680 grs. = 1 libra.

As far as the more precious metal is concerned, the gold solidus was, as a matter of fact, hardly to be met with under the second race. But, theoretically, it was still considered equal to 40 denarii.

40 × 32 = 1280 grs. 1280/12 = 106.6 grs. for the gold solidus.

But there are some actually met with containing 132 grs.

_Sols d'or_ as a reminiscence of the first and second race are said to have still lingered in use at the commencement of the third race of kings. Under Philip I. they occur as _francs d'or_ and _florins d'or_. In speaking of this latter term in the account of Florentine money (Appendix I. _supra_, p. 301), it has been pointed out as possible that it is merely the name for an ideal money, not an actual coin. (See however, preface, p. xiii.)

The actual reinstitution of gold monies in France has been already dealt with (text, p. 10). Of the species of the gold monies it would be almost an impossibility to speak.

Putting aside the disputed florin d'or, the first authenticated type of the gold monies was the _aignel d'or_ or _denier d'or a l'aignel_, so called from the lamb (agneau = aignel), stamped on it. Under St. Louis, to whom it is first assigned, it weighed 3 deniers 5 grs., was of fine gold and worth 12 sols. 6 deniers Tournois.

Philippe le Bel, Louis Huttin, Philippe le Long, and Charles le Bel maintained this coin at the same weight and standard. Those of King John were of the same standard or fineness, but were slightly heavier, weighing 3 deniers 16 grs. Under Charles VI. and Charles VII. both weight and fineness were considerably reduced. Under the various names of _agnels d'or_, _moutons d'or à la grande laine_, _moutons d'or à la petite laine_, this species had currency in France for nearly two hundred years. The imitations of it in surrounding countries were almost numberless.

_Royal_ (for the origin of the piece, see text, p. 10). Philippe le Bel minted _petits royaux d'or fin_, 70 to the mark and with an equivalence of 11 sols. Parisis. Gros royaux were the double of the petits royaux. Charles le Bel and Philippe de Valois struck royaux 58 to the mark. King John struck royaux or _deniers d'or au Roial_ 66 and 69 to the mark, Charles V. 63 to the mark, and Charles VI. 64 and 70 to the mark.

_Masses_ or _chaises_ (_cadieres_, _Royaux durs_), were coined by Philippe le Bel, 22-carat fine and 5 deniers 12 grs. the piece. The _chaises d'or_ of his successor varied greatly from these. Philippe de Valois coined them of fine gold, and 3 deniers 16 grs. the piece, and Charles VI. of fine gold 4 deniers 18 grs. the piece. Under Charles VII. the standard was reduced to 16 carats and the weight to 2 deniers 29 grs.

Of other early gold species it is sufficient to mention--

_Reines_, coined by Philippe le Bel. _Florin George_, " Philippe de Valois. _Parisis d'or_, 32-2/5 to mark = 20 sols. Parisis. _Lion_ 50 to the mark. _Pavillon_ 48 " _Couronne_ 45 " _Ange or angelot_ 33-2/5 " _Denier d'or à l'écu_ 54 "

The last of these species (_deniers d'or à l'écu_) continued to be minted, and had wide currency through the reign of John up to their cessation in 1354. There was, however, great variation in the standard from fine gold to 23, 22-3/4, 21, and even 18 carats.

The reign of John was marked, 1361, by the commencement of the coining of the important _franc d'or_ of fine gold, 63 to the mark = 20 sols. or 1 livre.

Its standard (of fine gold) was maintained under Charles V. and until Charles VII., but under the latter monarch the weight was reduced (to a tale of 80 to the mark).

_Fleurs de lis d'or_ (or _Florins d'or aux fleurs de lis_) were first minted in 1365 by Charles V. They were of fine gold, and weighed exactly 1 gros. Being equivalent to the franc (i.e. equal to 1 livre or 20 sols.), it received the same name, being styled _Franc à pied_ to distinguish it from the _Franc d'or_ proper, which was styled _Franc à cheval_.

_Saluts_ were first minted by Charles VI. in 1421 of fine gold, and of the same weight as the _francs à cheval_, but equal to 25 sols.

_Couronnes_ or _écus à la couronne_ were first coined by Charles VI. in 1384 of fine gold, weighing 3 deniers 4 grs. (i.e. 64 to the mark), and equal 22 sols.

This was the most celebrated gold coin of mediæval France. It lasted down to the time of the louis d'or, and was in high repute all over Europe.

Under Charles VI. and Charles VII. numerous changes were made in this piece both in weight and standard. At one time, under Charles VI., the standard fell as low as 16 carats. In 1436, however, they were again made of fine gold, but 70 to the mark, and issued at an equivalence of 25 sols. In 1455 they were issued 23-1/8 carats fine, 71 to the mark, and = 27 sols. the piece.

In 1473 Louis XI. issued them 72 to the mark; but two years later he began the issue of _écus d'or au soleil_ (_crowns of the sun_), of the same fineness as the couronne, but slightly heavier (70 to the mark).

From the days of Charles VIII. the _crown of the sun_ (_écus d'or au soleil_, also called _écus au porc-epi_) took the place of older crowns. Under Francis I. they were generally 23 carats fine and 71-1/6 to the mark, under Charles IX. 23 carats fine and 72-1/2 to the mark. At this latter they remained till the days of Louis XIV. The change of equivalence must be followed in the accompanying tables.

From the old _écus à la couronne_ must be distinguished the _écus heaumes_, which were issued in small quantities under Charles VI., generally 48 to the mark and 22 carats fine.

_Henris d'or_ occur only under Henry II., 23 carats fine, 2 deniers 20 grs. weight, and issued at an equivalence of 50 sols.

_Louis d'or_ (see text, p. 91), first issued in 1640 under Louis XIII. in imitation of the Spanish standard; 22 carats fine, 36-1/4 to the mark, and = 10 livres. Standard and weight remained unchanged until 1709. See tables below for subsequent change.

_Lis d'or_ have merely a transitory importance. They were issued in 1656 and shortly after, but almost immediately discontinued; 23-1/4 carats fine, 3 deniers 3-1/2 grs. the piece (60-1/2 to the mark) = 7 livres (to be distinguished as a third type from the _fleurs de lys d'or_ of King John, and the separate _fleur de lys d'or_ of Charles V.).

Silver Coins.

The silver deniers of the first royal race of France averaged 21 grs. in weight. Under the second race a much heavier system was adopted, those of Charlemagne weighing 28 grs., and those of Charles the Bold 32 grs. At the commencement of the third race they were still of fine silver, and weighed about 23 or 24 grs. The process of diminution by alloy and in weight began under Philippe I. For the question of the existence of a silver solidus, see Le Blanc, Introduction, p. xii. If they ever existed their place as a large silver specie was at an early date taken by that of the _gros Tournois_ (called also _gros deniers d'argent_, _gros deniers blancs_, and _sols d'argent_), attributed to S. Louis; 11 deniers 12 grs. fine, 7 grs. weight (58 to the mark), and issued at an equivalence of 12 deniers or 1 sol.

In the commencement, therefore, of this piece the gros Tournois was synonymous with the sol. Tournois. With the degeneration of the standard, however, the coin (the gros) parted company from the sol., which remained as a system of reckoning.

Up to the time of Philippe de Valois this money continued of undiminished weight and standard, and of the greatest celebrity. When that prince, in 1343, returned to good money after a period of debasement, he coined the gros Tournois 60 to a mark, of fine silver, and at an equivalence of 15 deniers Tournois. For its subsequent course, see tables infra.. It is noticeable that while in weight and value the gros Tournois was frequently changed, in fineness no diminution was made.

_Parisis d'argent_, issued only by Philippe de Valois (of fine silver, 4 deniers in weight = 15 deniers Tournois or 1 sol. Parisis).

_Testoons_ are to be regarded as the successors of the gros Tournois. They were first issued by Louis XII. in 1513; 11 deniers 18 grs. fine, 7 deniers 12-1/3 grs. weight, and = 10 sols. This species continued until its interdiction by Henry III. in 1575, who replaced them in that year by.

_Francs d'argent_, 10 deniers 10-10/23 grs. fine, 11 deniers 1 grain weight (or 17-1/4 to the mark), and = 20 sols. This piece continued until the days of Louis XIII.

_Quart d'écus_, also issued by Henry III., 11 deniers fine, 7 deniers 12-1/2 grs. weight, and = 15 sols. (i.e. a quarter the value of the écu d'or, then set at 60 sols.). This piece endured till 1646.

_Louis d'argent_, issued by Louis XIII. (see p. 402, _Louis d'or_), 11 deniers fine, 21 deniers 8 grs. weight for the écus blancs. This money continued till the Revolution.

_Lis d'argent_, issued for a few months in 1656, 11 deniers 12 grs. fine, 6 deniers 5 grs. weight, and = 20 sols.

_Franc_, modern (see text, p. 176).

The history of the French monetary system has been briefly told in the text, pp. 10, 31-40, 83-95, 167-197. The tables of the present Appendix afford particular information as to the course of the above-mentioned coins, down to the last great change in the French system. They bring out also, in strong relief, the numerous and arbitrary and excessive debasements which that system underwent in the Middle Ages. The particular episode of the eighteenth-century depreciation, which followed upon the erection of the system of John Law, may be, in brief, more appropriately sketched here than in the text.

The third of the three great recoinages of 1689, 1693, and 1703 had left the louis d'or tariffed at an equivalence of 15 livres, and the louis d'argent at 4 livres. By the end of 1708 these figures had sunk to 12 livres 15 sols. and 3 livres 8 sols. respectively. By the decree of April 1709 quite a different standard was adopted. The louis d'or was minted 32 to the mark, 22 carats fine, and = 16 livres 10 sols., while the louis d'argent was minted 8 to the mark, 11 deniers fine, and = 4 livres 8 sols. In the month of May 1709 a second edict raised these equivalences to 20 livres and 5 livres respectively. The sufferings of French commerce under this extraordinary tariff led to its annulling by the decree of 30th September 1713, by which a reduction of equivalence was made to 14 livres and 3 livres 10 sols. respectively. In December of the same year a reformation was again attempted. The new species were of the same content and fineness as the old, but were tariffed at 20 livres for the louis d'or, and 5 livres for the louis d'argent, while the unreformed specie were tariffed at 16 livres and 4 livres respectively. Three years later began the period of the monetary disorder of the minority of Louis XV. In November 1716 a new louis d'or was issued, 20 to the mark, 22 carats fine. In May 1718 again a new issue took place--louis d'or 25 to the mark, 22 carats; louis d'argent 10 to the mark, 11 deniers fine.

There were thus, at the time, four different louis d'or in existence, namely:--

The old louis d'or 36-1/4 to the mark. The old louis d'or of 1709} 30 " " " " 1715} " " 1716 20 " " " " 1718 25 " "

And similarly three kinds of louis d'argents or écus:--

The old louis d'argent 9 to the mark. The old louis d'argent of 1709} " " " 1715} 8 " " " " " 1718 10 " "

On the 25th July 1719 the Compagnie des Indes obtained the profit and farm of the French Mint for a term of nine years. The first outcome of their activity was the issue of the following tariff:--

Livres. Sols. Deniers. Écu of 1718 5 13 4 Louis d'argent of 1709 7 1 8 Old louis d'or 34 0 0 Old louis d'or of 1709 28 6 8

In the same year (1719, the first of their lease) this corporation further issued quite new species, namely, Quinzains d'or = 15 livres, and livres d'argent = 1/6-écu (both being cut at a tale of 65-5/11 to the mark). On the 5th March 1720 all the species were raised 41-3/11 per cent., the louis d'or of 1709 thus rising to an equivalence of 40 livres, and the louis d'argent of the same issue to 10 livres. On the 11th March 1720 the use of the gold specie was forbidden, and a recoinage determined on. These regulations, however, were not carried out, and by July the louis d'or had risen to 60 livres (= 1963-7/17 livres to the mark of fine gold), and the louis d'argent to 15 livres (= 130-10/11 livres to the mark of fine silver). The same enhancement prevailed in the divisional coin, and the confusion endured till the end of 1720. In September the louis d'or had fallen to 45 livres (= 1472-8/11 livres to the mark of fine gold), and the louis d'argent to 11 livres 5 sols. (= 98-2/11 livres to the mark of fine silver). At the same time (September) a new fabrication of species, according to the standard of 1718, was undertaken. Louis d'or, 25 to the mark, to issue at 54 livres; louis d'argent (or 1/3-écu), 30 to the mark, to issue at 3 livres. But from the 24th October a gradual diminution in this tariff was prescribed, and from the 1st of January 1721 these coins were to circulate respectively at 45 livres and 2 livres 10 sols. From the same date the louis d'or of 1709 was to circulate for 22 livres 10 sols., and the louis d'argent of 1709 for 5 livres 12 sols. 6 deniers.

On the 5th January 1721 the contract for coinage held by the Compagnie des Indes was annulled, and an intermediate attempt at reform was made in 1723, when the louis d'or was minted at 37-1/2 to the mark = 27 livres, and the louis d'argent at 10-3/8 to the mark = 6 livres 18 sols. The downward course of the specie set strongly in, and by 1726 they had fallen to 12 livres and 3 livres respectively. This facilitated the great reform and recoinage of 1726 (see text, p. 169). This recoinage was carried out on the basis of the edict of 1709--

Louis d'or, 30 to the mark = 20 livres. Louis d'argent, 8 to the mark = 5 livres.

By the edict of May of the same year their equivalence was raised 20 per cent.--the louis d'or to 24 livres, the louis d'argent to 6 livres.

TABLE OF THE FRENCH GOLD COINS.

(_Up to 1689, from Le Blanc; 1690 onwards, continued from various sources._)

+----------------------+-------------+--------------+------------+------+----------+ | |Price of Mark| | | Tale | | | Date. |of Gold. | Species. | Standard. | per | Value. | | +-------------+ | | Mark.+----------+ | |(L=Liv. | | | | (S=Sol. | | | S=Sol. | | | | D=Den.) | | | D=Den.) | | | | | +----------------------+-------------+--------------+------------+------+----------+ | |Liv.Sol. Den.| | | | S. D. | |1226 (S. Louis) | ... | Agnel |Fine gold |59-1/6| 12 6 | |1295 (Philippe le Bel)| ... | Gros royal | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1305 | 44 0 0| Petit royal |Fine gold[G]|70 | 13 9 | |1308, April 16 | 44 0 0| Chaise | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1310, August 12 | 49 10 0| Masse | 22 carat |34-1/2| 30 0 | |1310, January 22 | 55 11 9| Agnelet | Fine gold |59-1/6| 20 0 | |1312, August 24 | 55 10 4| ... | ... | ... | 15 0 | |1314 (Louis Huttin), | | | | | | | August 25 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 20 0 | |1314, November 29 | 55 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1315, May 6 | ... | Agnelet | Fine gold |59-1/6| 20 0 | | " January 15 | 45 0 0| ... | ... | ... | 15 0 | |1316 (Philippe le | | | | | | | le Long), Easter | 38 0 0| ... | ... | ... | 12 6 | | December 8 | 55 10 0| Agnelet | Fine gold |59-1/6| 20 0 | |1321 (Charles le Bel),| | | | | | | February 20 | 58 0 0| Agnel[H] | " |59-1/6| 20 0 | |1322, October 15 | 53 6 9| ... | ... | ... | 18 9 | |1325, February 16 | 67 10 0| Royal double | Fine gold | 58 | 25 0 | |1329 (Philippe | | | | | | | de Valois), | | | | | | | Dec. 26 | ... | Parisis | " |33-2/5| 37 6 | | ... | ... | Royal double | " | 58 | 22 6 | |1330, April 8 (poste | | | | | | | monnaie) | 41 13 0| Parisis | " |33-2/5| 25 0 | | | ... | Royal double | ... | ... | 15 0 | | | ... | Agnel | ... | ... | 14 7 | |1331, January 9 | 39 0 0| Royal | ... | ... | 22 6 | |1332, April 19 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 15 0 | | | | | | |(Tournois)| |1336, February 1 | 50 0 0| Écu | Fine gold | 54 | 20 0 | |1338, November 14 | 58 0 0| Lion | " | 50 | 25 0 | |1339, May 25 | 61 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " June 14 | 66 0 0| Pavillon | Fine gold | 48 | 30 0 | | " August 10 | 69 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " June 20 | 71 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 7 | 82 0 0| Couronne | Fine gold | 45 | 40 0 | | " February 15 | 86 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1340, April 16 | 96 0 0| Double | Fine gold | 36 | 60 0 | | ... | ... | Simple | " | 72 | 30 0 | | " May 27 |100 0 0| Doubles | 23 carat | 30 | 60 0 | | " October 7 |108 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 31 |114 14 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 7 |115 0 0| Anges |Fine gold |33-2/5| 75 0 | | ... | ... | Demi anges | ... |67-1/3| ... | |1341, August 23 |130 0 0| Anges |Fine gold |38-1/3| 75 0 | |1341, January 19 |136 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1342, June 28 |168 0 0| ... | ... | 42 | 85 0 | |1342, September 16 |171 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1342, April 10 |117 0 0| Écu |Fine gold | 54 | ... | |1343, September 22 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 45 0 | | (Forte monnaie) | 43 6 8| ... | ... | ... | 16 8 | |1344, March 27 | 44 3 9| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1346, July 17 | 50 0 0| Chaises |Fine gold | 52 | 20 0 | |1346, February 24 | 72 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1346, March 4 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 30 0 | |1347, April 6 | 75 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1347, April 14 | 44 3 4| Écu |Fine gold | 54 | 16 8 | |1347, September 27 | 75 0 0| Chaises |Fine gold | 52 | 30 0 | |1347, January 11 | 51 10 0| Écu |23 carat | 54 | 18 9 | |1348, August 30 | ... | ... |22-3/4 carat| ... | 20 0 | |1348, March 12 | 51 15 3| ... |22 carat | ... | 25 0 | |1349, May 23 | 52 1 6| ... |21 carat | ... | 25 0 | |1349, December 5 | 53 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1350, April 22 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | ... | ... | ... | ... | 20 0 | |1350, September 1 | | | | | | | (John I.) | 53 18 9| Écu |21 carat | 54 | 18 9 | |1351, June 20 | 54 17 6| ... |20-1/2 carat| ... | ... | |1351, July 23 | ... | ... |20 carat | ... | ... | |1351, August 18 | 96 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1351, August 20 | ... | Fleur de Lys |Fine gold | 50 | 40 0 | |1351, September 17 | 56 5 0| Écu |20 carat | 54 | 18 9 | |1351, September 24 | 58 2 6| ... |18 carat | ... | ... | |1351, November 20 | 60 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1351, February 3 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | ... | ... | ... | ... | 15 0 | |1352, April 21 | 60 18 9| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1352, May 18 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 20 0 | |1352, January 18 | 60 17 6| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1352, February 3 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 37 6 | |1353, May 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 40 0 | |1353, October 26 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | 62 16 4| ... | ... | ... | 15 0 | |1354, November 24 | 60 0 0| Moutons |Fine gold | 52 | 25 0 | |1355, June 3 | 61 5 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1355, June 19 | 62 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1355, January 3 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | ... | Moutons | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1356, November 25 | ... | Moutons | ... | ... | 30 0 | | " January 25 | 63 2 6| " | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1357, June 15 | ... |Petits moutons|Fine gold | 104 | 12 6 | |1358, August 31 | 78 15 0| Royal | " | 66 | 25 0 | | " April 20 | 80 12 6| " | " | 69 | 25 0 | |1359, March 31 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | ... | " | ... | ... | 40 0 | |1360, January 12 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | 60 0 0| Franc |Fine gold | 63 | 20 0 | |1361, April 23 | 60 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1363, July 29 | 61 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1364 (Charles V.), | | | | | | | May 3 | 62 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1364, August 5 | ... | Royal |Fine gold | 63 | 20 0 | | " September 10 | ... | Franc | " | 63 | 20 0 | |1365, May 5 | 62 10 0| Fleur de Lis | " | 64 | 20 0 | |1381, (Charles VI.), | | | | | | | April 25 | 60 10 0| " | " | 64 | 20 0 | |1384, March 18 | 65 10 0| Écu à la | ... | 60 | 22 0 | | | | couronne | | | | |1386, August 31 | 66 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1387, February 28 | 66 10 0| ... | ... |61-1/3| 22 6 | |1391, April 8 | 67 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1392, " 1 | 67 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1394, September 5 | 68 5 0| ... | ... | 62 | 22 6 | |1405, August 8 | 68 15 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1407, February 11 | 68 5 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1411, November 7 | 70 0 0| ... | ... | 64 | 22 6 | | " February 12 | ... | ... |23-11/28 | ... | ... | | | | | carat | | | | " March 5 | 70 15 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1414, September 6 | 72 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1417, May 17 | 92 0 0| Moutons |23 carat | 96 | 20 0 | | " October 21 | 96 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 28 | ... | ... |22 carat | 96 | 20 0 | | " December 9 | 92 0 0| Écu heaume | " | 48 | 40 0 | |1418, July 2 | 94 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " March 7 |150 0 0| Écu à la |23 carat | 64 | 50 0 | | | | couronne | | | | |1419, June 18 |144 0 0| Moutons | ... | 96 | 30 0 | | " October 24 | ... | Chaises |Fine gold | 40 | 80 0 | | | | or doubles | | | | | " February 26 |171 13 4| Écu à la | ... | 67 | 50 0 | | | | couronne | | | | | ... | ... | Moutons | ... | ... | 26 8 | | | | | | | Par. | |1420, October 27 | ... | Doubles |22-1/4 carat| 40 | 80 0 | |1421 (forte monnaie), | | | | | | | April 26 | 72 0 0| Écu à la |Fine gold | 66 | 22 6 | | | | couronne | | | | | " November 8 | 76 5 0| Saluts | " | 63 | 25 0 | |1422 (Charles VII.), | | | | | | | January 20 | ... | Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |22-1/2 carat| 64 | 25 0 | |1423, May 22 | 84 0 0| ... |Fine gold | 68 | 25 0 | | " January 28 | ... | Moutons |22 carat | 96 | 20 0 | | " February 8 | ... | Franc à | | | | | | | cheval |Fine gold | 80 | 20 0 | | " July 1 | 79 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1424, August 23 | ... | Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |23 carat | 67 | 22 6 | | " September 2 | 87 0 0| ... | ... | 70 | 25 0 | | " November 3 | ... | Moutons |22 carat | 96 | 15 0 | |1425, October 3 | ... | Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |23 " | 64 | 25 0 | | " January 12 | 87 10 0| ... | ... | 70 | ... | |1426, August 27 |105 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 11 |108 0 0| ... |22 carat | 70 | 30 0 | | " October 12 | ... | ... | ... | 72 | ... | | " January 9 | 90 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 17 | ... | ... |23 carat | 67 | 22 6 | | " March 19 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1427, May 27 | 72 0 0| ... | ... | ... | 20 0 | | " July 19 | ... | ... |21 carat | 72 | 25 0 | | " August 28 | 90 0 0| ... |22 " | 70 | 25 0 | | " October 15 | ... | Moutons |20 " | 96 | 15 0 | | " November 20 | 80 0 0| Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |20 " | 70 | 20 0 | | " February 21 | 92 10 0| ... |21 " | ... | 20 0 | |1428, July 31 | 97 10 0| ... |20 " | ... | 25 0 | | " October 26 | ... | Moutons |19 " | 96 | 15 0 | | " April | 88 0 0| Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |18 " | 70 | 20 0 | | " March 2 |105 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1429, June 17 | ... | ... |16 carat | ... | 25 0 | | " November 14 | | | | | | | (forte monnaie) | 77 10 0| Royal |Fine gold | 64 | 25 0 | |1429, December 7 | ... | Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |22 carat |67-1/2| 22 6 | |1430, July 7 | 97 0 0| Chaises |16 " | 68 | 20 0 | | " November 9 | ... | Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |22 " | 64 | 22 6 | |1431, May 30 | 77 10 0| Royal |Fine gold | 64 | 25 0 | | " September 27 |102 0 0| ... | ... | 70 | 30 0 | | " February 9 | ... | ... | ... | 64 | 25 0 | | " March 24 | 88 11 10| Écu à la | | | | | | | couronne |20 carat |67-1/2| 22 6 | |1432, January 16 | 78 15 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " December 31 | ... | Royal |Fine gold | 64 | 25 0 | |1435, October 14 |103 10 0| Écu à la | " | 70 | 30 0 | | | | couronne | | | | | " February 21 | 86 5 0| ... | ... | ... | 25 0 | |1437, September 1 | 87 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " November 22 | 92 10 0| ... |21 carat | 70 | 25 0 | |1438, April 30 | 86 5 0| ... |Fine gold | 70 | 25 0 | |1443, November 19 | 87 3 6| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1444, December 17 | 87 10 0| ... |23-1/4 carat| 70 | 25 0 | |1445, September 24 | 88 7 6| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1446, June 1 | 88 2 6| Écu à la |23-3/4 carat|70-1/2| 25 0 | | | | couronne | | | | | " January 21 | 97 15 0| ... |23-1/2 " | ... | 27 6 | |1447, July 27 | 97 5 7-1/2| ... |23-1/4 " | ... | ... | | " October 27 | 97 15 0| ... |23-1/2 " | ... | ... | |1450, June 15 | 99 0 0| ... |23-1/8 " | ... | ... | | " February 3 | 99 5 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1454, May 18 | 99 10 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1456, June 26 |100 0 0| ... | ... | 71 | ... | |1472 (Louis XI.), | | | | | | | March 12 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 28 4 | |1473, June 18 |103 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 8 |110 0 0| ... | ... | 72 | 30 3 | |1475, November 2 |118 10 0| Écu au soleil|23-1/8 carat| 70 | 33 0 | |1487 (Charles VII.), | ... | Écu à la | ... | ... | 35 0 | | July 30 | | couronne | | | | | ... | ... | Écu au soleil| ... | ... | 36 3 | |1488, April 24 |130 3 4| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1497 (Louis XII.), | | | | | | | April 7 |130 3 4| Écu au soleil| ... | ... | 36 3 | |1507, November 24 | ... | Écu au porc | ... | ... | 36 3 | | | | épi | | | | |1514 (Francis I.), | | | | | | | January 1 | ... | Écu au soleil| ... | ... | 36 3 | |1516, November 27 | ... | " | ... | ... | 40 0 | | ... | ... | Écu à la | ... | ... | 39 0 | | | | couronne | | | | |1517, May 25 | ... | Écu au soleil| ... | ... | 36 3 | |1519, June 10 |147 0 0| ... |22-7/8 carat|71-1/2| 40 0 | | " August 18 | ... | ... |23 " |71-1/6| 40 0 | |1532, March 5 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 45 0 | |1539, February 24 | ... | Écu à la |23 carat |71-1/6| 45 0 | | | | salemand | | | | |1540, May 18 |165 7 6| Écu à la | ... | ... | 45 0 | | | | croisette | | | | |1549 (Henry II.), | | | | | | | January 23 |172 0 0| Henris |23 carat | 67 | 50 0 | |1561, (Charles IX.), | | | | | | | August 30 |185 0 0| Écu au soleil|23 carat |72-1/2| 50 0 | |1569, November 23 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 53 0 | |1570, August 30 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 54 0 | |1572, July 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 52 0 | |1573, June 9 |200 0 0| ... | ... | ... | 54 0 | |1574 (Henry III.) | | | | | | | September 22 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 58 0 | |1575, June 17 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 60 0 | | " May 31 |222 0 0| ... | ... | ... | 60 0 | | " June 15 |222 0 0| Écu au soleil|23 carat |72-1/2| 65 0 | | " November 20 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 60 0 | |1602 (Henry IV.), | | | | | | | September |240 10 0| ... | ... | ... | 65 0 | |1615 (Louis XIII.), | | | | | | | February 5 |278 6 6| ... | ... | ... | 75 0 | |1630, February | ... | ... | ... | ... | 80 0 | |1631, August | ... | ... | ... | ... | 83 0 | |1633, July | ... | ... | ... | ... | 86 0 | |1636, March 5 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 94 0 | | " May 8 |320 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | | " June 28 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 104 0 | | " September 22 |384 0 0| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1640, April 3 | ... | Louis d'or |22 carat |36-1/4| 200 0 | |1652 (Louis XIV.), | | | | | | | April 4 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 220 0 | |1655, December 23 | ... | Louis d'or |23-1/4 carat|60-1/2| 140 0 | |1662, July 7 |423 10 11| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1679, April 10 |437 9 8-1/2| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1686, July 29 |437 7 5| Louis d'or | ... | ... | 230 0 | |1687, October 27 |447 7 2| ... | ... | ... | 225 0 | | | (Pite) | | | | | |1689, December 10 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 232 0 | | | ... | Écu d'or | ... | ... | 120 0 | |1693 |514-1/11 0 0| Louis d'or | ... | ... | 260 0 | |1703 |584-1/4 0 0| " | ... | ... | 300 0 | |1708 | ... | " | ... | ... | 255 0 | |1709, April |576 0 0| " |22 carat | 32 | 330 0 | | " May |654-6/11 0 0| " | ... | 30 | 400 0 | |1713, September 30 | ... | " | ... | ... | 280 0 | | " December | ... | " | ... | ... | 400 0 | |1716, November | ... | ... |22 carat | 22 | ... | |1718, May | ... | Louis d'or | " | 25 | ... | |1719, July 25 |927-3/11 0 0| " | ... | ... | 680 0 | | ... |1008 15 0 |Quinzains d'or| ... | ... | 300 0 | |1720, March 5 | ... | Louis d'or | ... | ... | 800 0 | | | | (of 1709) | | | | |1720, March 11 |1963-7/11 0 0| Louis d'or | ... | ... |1200 0 | | " September |1472-8/11 0 0| " | ... | ... | 900 0 | | ... | ... | " | ... | 25 |1000 0 | |1721, January 1 | ... | " | ... | ... | 900 0 | |1723 | ... | " | ... |37-1/2| 540 0 | |1726 | ... | " | ... | ... | 240 0 | | " (Recoinage) | 678 15 0| " |22 carat | 30 | 400 0 | | " May | 740 9 1| " |Raised 20 | ... | 480 0 | | | | | per cent | | | | ... | ... | Écu | ... | ... | 120 0 | |1785, October 30 | | | | | | | (recoinage) | 828 12 0| Louis d'or |22 carat | 32 | 480 0 | |1803, March 28 |3444-4/9 | 40 and |Issue price | ... | ... | | | francs per | 20-franc | being | | | | | kilog. | pieces | 3434-4/9 | | | | | fine = 3100| | per kilog.| | | | | fcs. per | | and 3091 | | | | | kilog. | | per kilog.| | | | | 9/10 fine. | | 9/10 fine.| | | |1830 November 8 | ... | 100 and | ... | ... | ... | | | | 10-franc | | | | | | | pieces | | | | |1850 | ... |10-franc piece| ... | ... | ... | |1835, February 25 |Mint change | ... | ... | ... | ... | | | = 6 francs | | | | | | | per kilog. | | | | | | " June 30 |Issue price | ... | ... | ... | ... | | |of kilog. of | | | | | | |fine gold | | | | | | |altered from | | | | | | |3434-4/9 fcs.| | | | | | |to 3437-7/9 | | | | | | |fcs. | | | | | +----------------------+-------------+--------------+------------+------+----------+

[Footnote G: See De Saulcy, _Documents_, i. 73, where it is stated that the fineness of these pieces was occasionally below 20 carats.]

[Footnote H: 1 Edward III. 4496 florins of the lamb worth 3s. 10-1/2d. a piece = £871, 2s. sterling (Exchequer Q.R. Ancient Miscellanea, 624/3. Expenses of Adam, bishop of Worcester, going to Rome).]

TABLE OF FRENCH SILVER COINS.

(_From the same sources, extended as above, p. 408._)

+----------------------+----------+---------------+-----------+---------+---------+ |Date. |Price of | Name of | Alloy. | Tale | Value. | | |Mark of | Species. | |per Mark.| | | |Silver. | | | | | +----------------------+----------+---------------+-----------+---------+---------+ | |Liv. Den.| | Den. Grs.| |Sol. Den.| | | Sol. | | | | | |1144 | 0 40 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1158 | 0 53 4 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1207 | 0 50 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1222 | 0 50 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1226 | 0 54 7 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 58 | 0 12 | |1283 | 0 54 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1285 | 0 54 6 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1293 | 0 61 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1295 | ... |Petits Tournois| 9 12 | 116 | 0 6 | |1296, May 20 | 3 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1297, July 4 | 3 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1298, May 25 | 3 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1299, June 7 | 3 18 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1302, April 23 | 4 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 2 | 5 4 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1303, August 15 | 6 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1304, May 7 | 6 5 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " June 25 | 6 14 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 8 | 6 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " December 13 | 7 5 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " March 1 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1305, April 18 | 8 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1306, October 1 | 2 15 6 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | |1308, April 16 | 2 19 0 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 58 | 0 12 | |1310, January 20 | 3 7 6 |Bourgeois Forte| 6 0 | 189 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1311, July 8 | 3 5 1-1/2|Bourgeois | 6 0 | 378 | 0 1 | | | | Singles | | | (Par.)| |1313, June | ... | ... | ... | ... | 0 1 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " September 19 | 2 14 7 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 58 | 0 12 | | | | | | | | | ... | ... |Denier Tournois| 3 18 | 220 | 0 1 | | | | | | | | | ... | ... |Denier Parisis | 4 12 | 221 | 0 1 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1314, November 29 | 2 4 7 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1315, May 6 | ... |Denier Parisis | 4 12 | 221 | 0 1 | | | | | | | (Par.)| | " January 15 | 2 4 0 |Denier Tournois| 3 18 | 220 | 0 1 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| |1317, March 1 | 3 7 6 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 59-1/6 | 1 3 | | ... | ... |Denier Parisis | 4 12 | 282 | 0 1 | |1321, February 20 | 3 7 6 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 59-1/6 | 1 3 | |1322, October 15 | 3 8 9 |Denier Parisis | 3 18 | 218 | ... | | " March 2 | 4 0 0 |Obole Blanche | 10 0 | 118 | 0 6 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1326, July 24 | 4 10 0 | ... | 9 0 | 135 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " January 20 | 5 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1327, " 8 | 5 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1328, November 7 | 5 11 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1329, December 26 | 4 4 0 |Gros Tournois | ... | ... | 1 6 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| |1330, April 8 | 2 18 0 | " | 11 12 | 60 | 1 0 | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | (Tour.)| | ... | ... |Gros Parisis | 11 12 | 48 | 1 0 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1331, January 9 | 2 17 6 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1333, June 12 | 2 15 6 |Denier Parisis | 4 4 | 138-1/2 | ... | |1336, February 13 | 3 12 6 |Gros à la | 10 16 | 96 | 1 10 | | | | Couronne | | | (Tour.)| |1338, November 14 | 4 12 0 | " | 8 0 | 96 | 0 10 | | " January 3 | 5 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1339, August 19 | 5 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 5 | 6 15 0 | ... | 7 0 | 105 | 0 10 | | " April 6 | ... | ... | 6 0 | 108 | 0 10 | |1340, August 1 | 7 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " December 4 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 27 | 8 14 0 |Gros à la Fleur| 6 0 | 84 | 1 3 | | | | de Lis | | | | | " February 8 | 9 4 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 13 | 9 12 0 | ... | 6 0 | 95 | 1 3 | |1342, June 30 |12 10 0 | ... | 6 0 | 120 | 1 3 | | " September 7 |13 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1343, April 9 |13 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 22 | 9 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | ... | ... |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 60 | 3 9 | | " October 26 | 3 4 0 | ... | ... | ... | 1 3 | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | |1344, February 16 | 3 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1345, April 9 | 3 10 6 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1346, July 17 | 4 10 0 |Double Parisis | 3 18 | 180 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1346, January 27 | 5 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 24 | 6 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " March 3 | ... | ... | 3 0 | 216 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Par.)| |1347, July 21 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 11 | 4 16 0 |Double Tournois| 3 8 | 183-1/3 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| |1348, August 31 | 5 0 0 | ... | 3 1-1/3| 183-1/3 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " December 31 | 6 0 0 | ... | 2 12 | 200 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| |1349, May 12 | 6 13 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " August 7 | 6 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " December 5 | 7 7 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 20 | 7 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1350, April 23 | 5 0 0 |Double Parisis | 3 12 | 168 | 0 2 | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | (Par.)| | " August 23 | 5 5 0 | " | 2 8 | 168 | 0 2 | | | | | | | (Par.)| | " October 26 | 5 12 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 5 | 6 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " March 6 | 6 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1351, May 17 | 6 18 0 |Blancs | 4 12 | 144 | 0 6 | | | | | | | (Par.)| | " June 23 | 7 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " August 18 | 8 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 12 |10 0 0 |Blancs | 4 0 | 144 | 0 6 | | | | | | | (Par.)| | " October 10 |10 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " December 16 |11 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 25 |12 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 4 |14 12 0 |Gros Tour. | 4 8 | 87-1/4 | 0 8 | | | | Blancs | | | (Tour.)| | " March 27 | 5 6 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | |1352, June 2 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " July 24 | 6 2 0 | ... | 4 0 | 100 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " August 16 | 6 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " October 24 | 6 18 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " November 25 | 8 0 0 | ... | 4 0 | 120 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " December 31 | 9 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " February 6 |10 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1353, April 22 |12 0 0 | ... | 3 12 | 140 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " July 30 |12 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1353, August 2 |13 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " October 26 | 4 15 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | | " November 27 | ... | ... | 3 8-4/5| 65 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " February 5 | 5 7 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 17 | 5 17 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1354, April 26 | 6 15 0 | ... | ... | 96 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " May 28 | 9 12 0 | ... | 3 0 | 120 | 0 8 | | | | | | | (Tour.)| | " July 5 |10 12 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 7 |12 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " November 24 | 4 4 0 |Blanc à la | 3 8 | 80 | 0 5 | | (forte monnaie) | | Couronne | | | (Tour.)| | " January 23 | 4 16 0 | ... | 2 12 | ... | ... | | " April 4 | 5 6 0 | ... | 3 0 | 120 | ... | |1355, May 20 | 6 10 0 | ... | 2 12 | ... | ... | | " July 6 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 17 |10 0 0 |Blancs à la | 3 9 | 72 | 1 3 | | | | Couronne | | | (Tour.)| | " August 22 | ... | ... | 3 0 | ... | ... | | " August 26 |11 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " September 28 |12 10 0 | ... | 3 0 | 80 | ... | | " October 9 |14 0 0 | ... | 3 0 | 100 | ... | | " November 10 |16 0 0 | ... | 2 12 | 100 | ... | | " December 15 |18 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 3 | 5 5 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | | " January 5 | ... |Blanc à la | 8 0 | 96 | 0 10 | | | | Couronne | | | | | " " 16 | ... |Blanc à la | 4 0 | 60 | 0 8 | | | | Fleur de Lis | | | | |1356, August 3 |6 10 0 | ... | 3 0 | 90 | ... | | " September 19 |7 5 0 | ... | 3 0 | 112-1/2 | ... | | " October 28 |8 17 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " November 23 |7 8 0 |Gros | 6 0 | 80 | 1 0 | | " " 28 |7 8 0 |Gros Blancs | 4 0 | 80 | 1 0 | | " February 7 | ... | ... | 3 0 | 112-1/2 | 1 0 | | " March 26 |6 10 0 |Gros à la | 5 0 | 70 | 0 10 | | | | Couronne | | | | |1357, January 23 |8 10 0 |Blanc à la | 4 0 | 60 | 1 3 | | | | Fleur de Lis | | | | |1358, May 9 |10 0 0 | ... | 3 8 | ... | ... | | " July 1 |12 0 0 | ... | 3 0 | 64 | ... | | " August 8 |13 10 0 | ... | 3 0 | 96 | ... | |1358, August 30 | 6 15 0 |Blancs à la | 4 0 | 53-1/3 | 1 0 | | | | Couronne | | | | | " November 13 | 7 0 0 | | | 75 | | | " " 22 | 8 0 0 | | 3 0 | 75 | | | " December 3 | 8 12 0 | | | | | | " " 9 | 9 10 0 | | | | | | " February 22 | 7 0 0 | | 3 0 | 90 | 0 6 | | " " 27 | | | 3 0 | 100 | | |1359, April 20 | 7 10 0 | | 3 0 | 120 | | | " May 28 |11 10 0 | | 2 12 | 150 | | | | |Gros Blancs | 3 0 | 72 | 1 3 | | " June 5 | 9 0 0 |Blancs aux | 3 12 | 70 | 1 3 | | | | trois Fleurs | | | | | | | de Lis | | | | | " June 12 | | | 3 0 | | | | " July 9 | | | | | | | " " 12 | | | 2 15 | | | | " " 31 |16 4 0 | | 2 12 | 80 | | | " September 18 |22 13 0 | | 2 6 | 90 | | | " October 5 | | | | 112-1/2 | | | " " 22 |29 8 0 | | 2 0 | 120 | | | " November 27 |12 0 0 |Gros à | 4 0 | 48 | 2 6 | | | | l'estoile | | | | | " December 5 |15 0 0 | | 3 0 | | | | " " 19 |18 9 0 | | | | | | " " 31 |23 12 6 | | | | | | " January 2 |24 12 6 | | 2 12 | 60 | | | " " 22 |34 12 6 | | 2 0 | 72 | | | " February 17 | | | | 80 | | | " " 27 |53 17 6 | | | 100 | | | " March 4 |77 16 0 | | 1 12 | 100 | | | " " 21 |102 0 0 | | | 125 | | | " " 31 |11 0 0 |Gros | 4 0 | 64 | | | | |Blancs | | | | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | |1360, April 27 | | | 3 0 | | | | " May 4 | | | 2 12 | | | | " " 26 | | | 2 0 | | | | " June 2 | 7 0 0 |Blancs à la | 2 0 | 64 | 0 6 | | | | Fleur de Lis | | | | | " " 27 | | | | 80 | 0 7-1/2| | " " 28 | 9 0 0 | | 1 12 | 80 | | | " " 29 |10 10 0 | | | | | | " August 7 |15 0 0 | | | 100 | | | " " 18 |17 0 0 | | | 120 | | | " " 22 |18 10 0 | | | | | | " September 7 | 7 0 0 |Blanc à la | 4 0 | 66 | 0 10 | | | | couronne | | | | |1360, October 22 | ... | ... | 2 12 | ... | ... | | " November 13 | 8 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 19 | 9 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 12 | 5 8 0 |Blanc à la | 4 12 | 54 | 0 10 | | | | fleur de lis | | | | |1361, April 3 | 5 0 0 |Gros Tournois | 11 12 | 84 | 1 3 | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | |1364, May 3 | 5 0 0 |Gros d'argent | 11 12 | 84 | 1 3 | |1365, May 2 | 5 5 0 |Blanc | 4 0 | 96 | 0 5 | |1370, June 19 | 5 15 0 |Gros d'argent | 11 3-1/4 | 96 | 1 3 | |1372, August 9 | 5 16 0 | ... | 11 17 | ... | ... | |1374, " 12 | ... | ... | 11 6 | ... | ... | |1378, " 19 | ... | ... | 11 17 | ... | ... | |1381, April 16 | 5 8 0 |Gros d'argent | 11 6 | 96 | 1 3 | | " August 15 | 5 16 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1384, March 22 | ... |Blanc à l'écu | 6 0 | 75 | 0 10 | |1386, October 31 | ... | ... | 5 12 | 74-1/2 | ... | |1389, " 30 | 5 18 0 | ... | 5 12 | ... | ... | | " July 4 | 6 3 9 | ... | 5 12 | ... | 1 0 | |1391, April 8 | 6 5 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1399, November 27 | 6 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1401, July 26 | ... |Gros | 9 0 | 81 | 1 3 | |1405, " 6 | 6 12 6 |Blanc à l'écu | 5 6 | 76-1/2 | 0 10 | |1411, November 5 | 6 15 0 | ... | 5 0 | 80 | ... | |1413, July 12 | 7 0 0 |Gros d'argent | 11 16 | 84-7/12 | 1 8 | |1414, June 26 | 7 2 0 |Blanc à l'écu | 5 0 | 80 | 0 10 | |1417, May 17 | 8 0 0 |Gros | 8 0 | 80 | 1 8 | | " October 21 | 9 0 0 | ... | 5 8 | ... | ... | |1418, May 28 | 9 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 19 | 10 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " March | 14 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " " 7 | 16 10 0 | ... | 3 8 | ... | ... | |1419, February 17 | ... |Blanc | 2 0 | 168 | 0 5 | |1420, April 9 | 18 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " May 8 | 26 0 0 |Gros | 2 12 | 100 | 1 8 | | " February 11 | ... | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1421, April 26 | 7 0 0 |Gros d'argent | 11 12 | 86-1/4 | 1 8 | |1422, October 30 | 7 10 0 |Blanc | 4 12 | 90 | 0 10 | |1423, December 31 | 7 0 0 | ... | 5 0 | 80 | ... | | " March 10 | ... | ... | 6 0 | 90 | ... | |1424, " 17 | ... |Blanc | 5 0 | 80 | 0 10 | |1425, June 9 | 6 5 0 |Gros | 8 0 | 90 | 1 0 | |1425, August 17 | 7 0 0 | Blanc | 4 0 | 128 | 0 5 | | " January 23 | 7 10 0 | Grand Blanc | 9 0 | 96 | 1 3 | | " March 16 | 7 5 0 | Blanc | 5 0 | 80 | 0 10 | |1426, May 28 | 8 10 0 | ... | 4 0 | ... | ... | | " August 20 | 9 10 0 | ... | 3 8 | ... | ... | | " November 19 | 11 0 0 | ... | 3 0 | 81 | ... | | " January 11 | 7 0 0 | ... | 4 12 | 72 | ... | |1427, August 26 | 8 0 0 | ... | 4 0 | 80 | ... | | " October 4 | 8 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1428, July 31 | 11 0 0 | ... | 3 0 | 81 | ... | | " January 24 | 13 10 0 | ... | 2 8 | 84 | ... | | " March 2 | 15 0 0 | ... | 2 0 | ... | ... | |1429, May 4 | ... | ... | 1 18 | ... | ... | | " June 10 | 20 0 0 | ... | 1 12 | ... | ... | | " November 5 | 7 0 0 | ... | 5 0 | 80 | 0 8 | | (forte monnaie) | | | | | | | " January 16 | 7 0 0 | ... | 5 0 | 80 | 0 10 | |1430, December 22 | 6 15 0 | Gros | 11 12 | 120-3/4 | 1 3 | |1431, January 9 | 7 5 0 | Blancs | 5 0 | 80 | 0 10 | |1432, April 11 | 9 6 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " August 22 | 9 10 2 | Gros | 4 18 | 68 | 1 2 | | " September 29 | 9 16 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " January 16 | 7 5 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1434, May 28 | ... | Petit blanc | 4 0 | 128 | 0 5 | |1435, September 22 | 9 0 0 | Blanc | 4 0 | 80 | 0 10 | | " February 21 | 7 0 0 | ... | 5 0 | ... | ... | |1436, May 24 | ... | Blanc à l'écu | 5 0 | ... | ... | | " April 21 | 7 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1437, November 27 | 9 0 0 | ... | 3 8 | ... | ... | | " April 3 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1440 | 7 8 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1441 | 7 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1447, July 7 | 8 0 0 | Blanc à l'écu | 4 21 | 82-3/4 | 0 10 | | " " 27 | 8 10 0 | Gros d'argent | 11 15 | 68 | 2 6 | | ... | 7 10 0 | Blanc | 5 0 | 90 | 0 10 | |1456, June 26 | 8 10 0 | " | 4 12 | 81 | 0 10 | | ... | 8 15 0 | Gros d'argent | 11 12 | 69 | 2 6 | |1465, July | ... | ... | ... | 69-5/6 | | | ... | 8 10 0 | Blanc | 4 12 | 81 | 0 10 | |1473, January 8 | 10 0 0 | ... | ... | 86 | 0 11 | | ... | ... | Gros d'argent | 11 12 | 69 | 2 9 | |1475, November 2 | ... |Blanc au soleil| 4 12 | 78-1/2 | 1 0 | |1488, April 24 | 11 0 0 |Blanc au soleil| 4 12 | 78-1/2 | 1 1 | |1497, " 7 | 11 0 0 |Blanc à la | 4 12 | 86 | 1 0 | | | | couronne | | | | |1513, " 6 | 12 10 0 |Testoons | 11 18 | 25-1/2 | 10 0 | |1514, January 1 | 11 0 0 |Blancs | 4 12 | 86 | 1 0 | | " February 17 | 12 15 0 |Testoons | 11 18 | 25-1/2 | 10 0 | |1519, June 10 | 12 10 0 |Blancs à la | 4 6 | 92-1/2 | 1 0 | | | | couronne | | | | |1521, September 20 | 13 5 0 |Testoons | 11 6 | 25-1/2 | 10 0 | |1532, March 1 | ... | ... | ... | ... | 10 6 | |1539, February 24 | 12 10 0 |Blanc à la | 4 6 | 92-1/2 | 1 0 | | | | Salemand | | | | |1540, May 18 | 14 0 0 |Testoons | ... | ... | 10 8 | |1541, " 4 | ... |Douzains à | 3 16 | 91-1/4 | 1 0 | | | | la croisette | | | | |1547, March 31 | ... |Douzains | ... | 91-1/2 | 1 0 | |1549, October 25 | 14 10 0 |Testoons | ... | ... | 11 0 | | " January 23 | 15 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | 11 4 | |1550, April 20 | 14 5 0 |Douzains | 3 12 | 93-1/2 | 1 0 | |1561, August 30 | 15 15 0 |Testoons | 10 18-3/4 | 25-1/2 | 12 0 | |1572, June 13 | ... |Douzains | 3 12 | 102 | 1 0 | |1573, " 9 | 17 0 0 |Testoons | ... | ... | 13 0 | |1575, " 17 | ... | " | ... | ... | 14 6 | | " May 31 | 19 0 0 |Francs |10 10-10/23| 17-1/4 | 20 0 | | " " | 17 15 0 |Douzains | 3 0 | 102 | 1 0 | |1577, June 15 | ... |Testoons | ... | ... | 16 0 | | " November 20 | ... | " | ... | ... | 14 6 | |1580, October 17 | 19 0 0 |Quart d'écu | 11 0 | 25-1/3 | 15 0 | |1602, September | 20 5 4 | " | ... | ... | 16 0 | | " " | ... |Franc | ... | ... | 21 4 | | " " | ... |Testoons | ... | ... | 15 0 | |1636, May 8 | 23 10 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | | " June 28 | ... |Franc | ... | ... | 27 0 | | " September 22 | 25 0 0 | ... | ... | ... | ... | |1641, November 18 | 26 10 0 |Louis | 11 0 | 8-11/12 | 60 0 | | | | d'argent | | | | |1652, April 4 | ... | " | ... | ... | 66 0 | |1655, December 23 | ... | " | 11 12 | 30-1/2 | 20 0 | |1679, April 10 | 29 11 0 | " | ... | ... | 60 0 | |1689, December 10 | ... | " | ... | ... | 62 0 | | " " | ... |Recoinage | ... | ... | 66 0 | | | | new species | | | | | | | of Louis | | | | | | | d'argent | | | | |1693, " | 33 16 0 |Louis | ... | ... | 68 0 | | | | d'argent | | | | |1703, December 10 |38-10/11 | | | | | | | 0 0 |Louis d'argent | ... | ... | 80 0 | |1709, April | 38 8 0 | " | 11 0 | 8 | 88 0 | | " May |43-7/11 | | | | | | | 0 0 | " | ... | |100 0 | |1713, September 30 | ... | " | ... | | 70 0 | |1718, May | ... |Louis d'argent | | | | | | | or écu | 11 0 | 10 | 80 0 | |1719, July 25 |61-9/11 | | | | | | | 0 0 | ... | ... | ... |113 4 | | " |69-1/8 | | | | | | | 0 0 |Livres d'argent| ... | 65-5/11 | ... | |1720, September |98-2/11 | | | | | | | 0 0 |Louis d'argent | ... | ... |235 0 | | ... | ... | " |(=1/4 écu) | 30 | 60 0 | |1721, January 1 | ... | " |( " ") | ... | 50 0 | |1723, | ... | " | ... | 10-3/8 |138 0 | |1726, | 46 18 0 | " | ... | 8 |100 0 | |1726, May | 51 3 3 | " | ... | ... |120 0 | |1785 |Silver | | | | | | | coins | | | | | | | unaltered| ... | ... | ... | ... | |1803 |Kilog. | Franc | .900 | 5 | ... | | | fine | | | grms. | | | | silver | | | wght. | | | | =222-2/8 | | | | | | | Francs | | | | | | | (218-8/9 | | | | | | | Francs | | | | | | | being | | | | | | | returned | | | | | | | to the | | | | | | | importer)| | | | | |1835, June 30 |Kilog. | " | " | ... | ... | | | fine | | | | | | | silver | | | | | | | =222-2/9 | | | | | | | Francs | | | | | | | (220 | | | | | | | Francs | | | | | | | being | | | | | | | returned | | | | | | | to the | | | | | | |importer.)| | | | | |1865, Latin Union | ... | ... |Pieces | | | | | | | under 5 | | | | | | | Francs | | | | | | | reduced to| | | | | | | .835 fine | | | +----------------------+----------+---------------+-----------+---------+---------+

FOOTNOTES:

[Footnote 25: "En 1359 année de grandes secousses dans le prix du marc d'argent le public adopte comme unité l'écu d'or qui n'a pas varié." Vicomte D'Avenel, _Histoire de la propriété, etc._, i. p. 54.]

[Footnote 26: For an account of the remaining species of _livres_, all differing in value, and amounting to at least twenty in number, _la livre de Provins_, _du Mans_, _de Bretagne_, _Languedoc_, _Dauphiné_, _Bourgogne_, _la livre Augevin_, etc. etc., see Vicomte D'Avenel, _Histoire de la propriété, etc._, i. 37-39, 482-494.]

GENERAL INDEX

A.

Act of George III., 235.

" 1834, United States, 257.

Adams, John Quincy, 253, 258.

Aislabie, Mr., 228.

Alfonso X., The Wise, 321.

Allard, Mr., 290.

Anne, Queen, 277.

Antwerp, position of, in the 17th century, 62.

Arbitrage, 17th century, 73.

Augsburg girogeld, 387.

Austria, monetary system of, 376.

Austrian standard, or Convention standard, 374, 386.

B.

Bacon, Sir Francis, 134.

Balfour, Right Hon. A.J., 284.

Bank of France, table of reserves, 186.

Batavian Republic, 352.

Barbour, Sir D., 284, 293.

Barrett, Mr., 147.

Bavaria, 374.

Bavarian, Louis the, 7.

Bayreuth, 374.

Beernaert, M., 287.

Bel, Charles le, 400.

" Philippe le, 10, 12, 399.

Binney, Mr., 259.

Birch, J.W., 283.

Bland, Mr., 261, 279.

Bland, Bill, 279, 283.

Bogy, Mr., 279.

Boissevain, M., 290.

Bold, Charles the, 402.

Brandenburg-Anspach, 374.

" Frederick William of, 199.

Bremen, 373.

Brunswick, 381.

Brussels conference, 286.

Byzantium, monetary system of, 2.

C.

Calhoun, Mr., 259.

Calonne, XV., 172.

Calvert, 142.

Cambreleng, Mr., 258.

Carleton, Mr., 140.

Caswall, Mr., 228.

Chambers, Mr., 259.

Chaplin, H., 284.

Charlemagne, monetary system of, 2, 397.

Charles I. of Spain, 109.

" I. of England, 133, 146.

" II. of England, 219, 223.

" II. of Spain, 329.

" III. of Spain, 332.

" IV. of Spain, 332.

" V. of Germany, 96, 364.

" VI. of France, 399, 400, 401, 402.

" VII. of France, 399, 400, 401.

" VIII. of France, 39, 401.

" IX. of France, 84, 402.

Clay, Mr., 259.

Clowney, Mr., 258.

Cologne, Bimetallic conference of, 282.

Commission on the depreciation of silver, 1876, 279.

Compagnie des Indes, 406.

Conference (see International) of 1878 279; of 1881, 281.

Convention of Dresden, 380.

" " Vienna, 374.

" standard, or Austrian standard, 386.

Courtney, Leon. H., 283, 294.

Course of monetary depreciation, 1300-1500, 15.

Crawford, Secretary, 254.

Crusades, effect of, on currency, 3, 5.

Currie, Bertram Wodehouse, 294.

D.

Dandolo, Giovanni, 4.

Denmark, 277.

Depreciation of standard, general causes of, preface xii.

Discounts in modern system, function of, 165.

Ducat, or Imperial standard, 387.

Dunham, Mr., 260.

E.

Edward III.'s changes of ratio, 45.

" VI., 121, 124.

Elizabeth, 129, 130, 132.

Emperor Sigismund, 27.

England, Act of 1798, 239.

" " 1816, 243.

" agitation of 1611, 137.

" bank restriction, 241.

" coinage of 1527, 118.

" " Act of 1870, 243.

" crisis of 1622, 141.

" currency measures of 1544, 121.

" effects of the ratio of 1698, 227.

" Elizabeth's final revision, 131.

" " recoinage, 129.

" export in 1690, 223.

" first coining of gold in, 11.

" indenture of 1344, 42.

" " 1346, 44.

" " 1353, 45.

" " 1414, 55.

" " 1460-1470, 58.

" " 1670, 221.

" in 1378, 49.

" measures of 1619, 139.

" mintings and movements of metals, 1855-1894, 244.

" monetary history of, 1300-1500, 41; 1500-1600, 113; 1660-1894, 219.

" monetary inquiry of 1381, 51.

" " troubles of Henry VI., 57.

" proclamation of 1661, 220.

" recoinage of, 1414, 55; 1696, 225; 1774, 235.

" Sir Isaac Newton's report, 1717, 229.

" Sir Robert Stone on the Mint, 151.

" situation in 1638, 149.

" state of the coinage in 1774, 253.

" Tudor debasement, 123.

Ewing, Mr., 258.

F.

Farrer, Lord, 283, 294.

Ferdinand, 99, 101.

" and Isabella, 322, 324, 327.

" II., 321.

" VI., 331.

" VII., 332.

Flanders, commencement of gold coinage, 10.

Florence, monetary history of, in the 14th century, 18; 1500-1660, 93.

" monetary system of, 301.

France, action of the states general in 1420, 27.

" commencement of gold coinage in, 9.

" course of ratio, 1660-1894, 179.

" currency debasement in, 32.

" mint inquiry of 1575, 85.

" monetary history of, 1286-1500, 31; 1500-1660, 83; 1600-1894, 167.

" monetary system of, 396.

" recoinage of, 1689, 167.

" " 1693, 168.

" " 1709, 168.

" reform of, 1577, 87.

" " 1640, 91.

" " 1726, 169.

" " 1785, 171.

" " 1803, 177.

Francis I., 201, 402.

Franconian currency, 369.

Frankfort, 373, 378.

Frederick Augustus, 374.

" I., 203.

" IV., 27.

" the Great, 378.

Free trade in the precious metals, 163.

Fremantle, Sir C.W., 283, 290.

G.

Gallatin, 258.

Gaudin, M., 176.

George III., 231.

Germany, attempts at reform, 1860-70, 213.

" commencement of gold coinage in, 6.

" conference of Munich, 1837, 205.

" gold standards, 387.

" Leipzig standard, 200.

" monetary history, 14th and 15th centuries, 25; 1500-1600, 95; 1660-1894, 197, 360.

" new Imperial system, 1871, 215.

" standards, silver, 385.

" the convention standard, 201.

" " Dresden convention, 1838, 207.

" " Vienna conference, 1857, 209.

" " Zinnaische standard, 199.

" 24-gulden standard, 202.

" 24-1/2-gulden standard, 202.

Gillet, Mr., 258.

Godley, Arthur, C.B., 294.

Gold gulden standard, 388.

" reintroduction of coinage of, 1.

Gorham, Mr., 259.

Goschen, Rt. Hon. J.G., 279, 280.

Graumann, Philip, 378.

" standard, 379.

Gresham, Sir Thomas, 73.

Grell, Jacob, 8.

Groesbeck, 279.

H.

Hacket, Mr., 117.

Hamburg banco, 387.

" bank, establishment of, 105.

" monetary history of, 383.

Hamilton, Alexander, XV. 251.

Hanover, 381.

Harrison, President, 263.

Heath, Sir Robert, 142.

Henry II. of Castile, 84, 324.

" III. of England, 4, 21.

" III. of France, 85, 88, 89, 236, 404.

" III. of Spain, 324.

" IV. of France, 89, 90.

" VII. of England, 59.

" VIII. of England, 121, 129.

Herschell, Lord, 283, 294.

Hesse-Darmstadt, 378.

Higher Circles (Germany), 373.

Holland in 1872, 271.

Houldsworth. Sir W.H., 284.

I.

Imperial, or ducat standard, 387.

India, 294.

" closing of the mints, 293.

" statistics of metals and minting, 299.

Ingham, Secretary, 256.

International conferences (see Conferences), 275.

" monetary congress, 285.

Isabella and Ferdinand, 322, 324, 327.

Italian republics (see Florence and Venice), gold coinage of, 4-5.

" " trade of, 3.

J.

James I. of England, 133, 145.

" II. of England, 223.

Jefferson, 248.

John, king of France, 45, 400.

John II. of Spain, 327.

" III. of Spain, 323.

Jones, Mr., 279.

K.

Kammer-Gerichts currencies, 369.

"Kipper und Wipper Zeit," 102, 369.

Knight, Mr., 259.

Kronen-thaler standard, 386.

L.

Lamond, Miss, 129.

Latin union, the, 191.

Law, John, 169.

" system of, 404.

Le Blanc, 89, 92.

Legal tender, law of, 350.

Legislation of 1873-74, United States, 261.

Leipzig standard, 373, 386.

Levi, M. Montefiore, 287.

Levy, Moritz, 287.

Lippe, 381.

Liverpool, Lord, 233, 239, 242.

Locke, John, 140, 225, 226.

Louis VII. of France, 9.

" IX. of France, 9.

" XI. of France, 59.

" XII. of France, 403.

" XIII. of France, 404.

" XV. of France, 405.

Louis Huttin, 399.

Lowndes, Mr., 256.

Lübeck, 383.

" courant, 387.

" mint, 7.

Lubbock, Sir John, 283.

Lüneburg, 384.

M.

Maddison, Sir Ralph, 148.

Magnin, M., 286.

Mainz, 373, 378.

Malet, Lord, 284.

Marcello, Nicolo, 312.

Maria Theresa, 374.

Maurice, Elector, 363.

Maximilian, Emperor, 347.

McKim, Mr., 258.

M'Creary, Mr., 290.

Mecklenburg, 381.

Mint laws, wide effect of, 157.

Mirabeau, preface xv.

Misnian currency, 369.

Mocenigo, Pietro, 312.

Modern monetary system, evolution of the, 161.

Montague, Sir Samuel, 284.

Moors, 1.

Morris, Robert, preface xv. 247.

N.

Netherlands in 1816, 269.

" the monetary system of the, 268, 272, 278, 345. See "Plakkaats."

Newton, Sir Isaac, preface xv. 229, 231.

Norway, 277.

Nürnberg, 368, 374.

O.

Oldenburg, 381.

Old Imperial standard of 1559, 386.

Ordinances, first Imperial mint, 96, 363.

" second Imperial mint, 99, 363.

" third Imperial mint, 99, 364, 366.

P.

Palatinate, 373, 375, 378.

Palmer, Andrew, 151.

Parieu, De., 276.

Paris, conference of, 1867, 276.

" " 1878, 280.

" " 1881, 281.

" congress of, 1889, 286.

Philip Augustus of France, 9.

" I. of France, 399.

" II. of Spain, 110, 329.

" III. of Spain, 111, 329.

" IV. of Spain, 111, 329.

" V. of Spain, 330.

Philippe le Long, 399.

Pistole standard, 388.

"Plakkaats" of the Netherlands, 66, 71, 74.

Pomerania, 373.

Ponte, Nicolo da, 312.

Porter, Alexander, 259.

Portugal, monetary history of, 1688-1854, 273.

Precious metals, production of, 1550-1660, 65; 1660-1893, 155.

Prussian monetary system, 203, 378.

" standard, 386.

R.

Ratio between gold and silver in Europe, 1300-1500, 40; 1500-1669, 69; 1669-1894, 157.

Ratio, different rate of, coexisting, 16.

" Hamilton's statement of 1791, 251.

" in 1360, 49.

" methods of calculation of, preface xiv.

Reichstag of Augsburg, 365, 367.

" " Regensburg, 367.

Rogers, Mr., 151.

Rothschild, Lord Alfred de, 288, 291.

Royal commission of 1868, 277.

" commission on the precious metals, 283.

Rupert of Germany, 11, 26.

S.

Salisbury, Earl of, 134, 136.

Salzburg, 375, 377.

Scandinavian States, 278.

Schleswig-Holstein courant, 387.

Seigniorage in France and England abolished, 162, 163, 220.

Selden, Mr., 259.

Silsbee, Mr., 259.

Silver, course of modern depreciation, 277.

" sources of supply of 1300-1500, 14.

Soetbeer Dr. A., xiv. xv. 287, 289.

Southard, Mr., 259.

South German system, 377, 378, 386.

Spain, first coinage of gold in, 11.

" monetary history of, 23, 106.

" monetary system of, 319.

Spanish Netherlands, 348.

Sprague, Mr., 259.

Strachey, Lieut.-Gen. Richard, C.S.I., 294.

Sweden, 277, 373.

T.

Terrell, E.H., 287.

Tirard, M., 291.

Treves, 373.

Tron, Nicolo, 312.

Twenty-four-gulden standard, 377, 386.

" and half-gulden standard, 378, 386.

U.

United Provinces, 348.

" States Bland and Sherman Acts, 263.

" " currency, history of, 246.

" " gold export of 1820, 255.

" " Hamilton's report, 1791, 251.

" " mint coinages, 265.

" " Morris's scheme, 1782, 247.

" " movement of the precious metals, 266.

" " ordinances of 1786, 250.

" " report of 1785, 249.

" " " 1817, 253.

" " scheme of 1792, 253.

Upper circles (Germany), 377.

V.

Valois, Philippe de, 35, 403.

Venice, gold coinage of, 5.

" the monetary system of, 310.

Vienna, convention of 1857, 376.

" first international conference of 1867, 275.

W.

Waldeck, 381.

Webster, M., 259.

Wechselgeld, or Wechselzahlung, 386.

Welby, Sir R. Earle, G.C.B., 294.

Wendish states, 384.

White, C.H., 257, 258.

Wilde, Mr., 259.

Willard, Mr., 279.

William I. of Holland and Belgium, 269.

" III. of England, 222, 225.

Wilson, Sir Rivers, 290.

Windam, Secretary, 263.

Wismar, 384.

Wolsey's mint policy, 115.

Würzburg, 374.

Z.

Zinnaische standard, 371, 386.

INDEX OF COINS

A.

Agnelet, 408.

Agnels d'or, 399.

Agnus dei, 324, 325, 326.

Aguilas, 334.

Aignel d'or, or Denier d'or a l'aignel, 399.

Albus, 100. (See Rhenish.)

Andries florin, 347.

Ange or Angelot, 400, 409.

Angel, 58, 113, 120, 131, 139, 408.

Angellets, 117.

Angelot or Ange, 400.

Aragon. (See Florin.)

Augustale, 4.

August d'or, 388.

B.

Barile (or Carolino), 307.

Batzen, 369, 372.

Bavarian carolus or 3-gulden piece, (gold) 375.

" max d'or, 375.

Blanc, 420, 421. (See Grand, Gros, Obole, Petit.)

Blanc à la couronne, 417, 418, 419, 422.

" à la Fleur de lis, 418, 419, 420.

" à la Galema, 422.

" à l'écu, 420.

" au soleil, 421, 422.

" aux trois Fleurs de lis, 419.

Blanca, 324, 326, 328, 344.

" vieja, 325.

Blanco segundo, 322.

Blancos, 324, 344.

Bourgeois, 415.

Brabant thaler or Kronen thaler, 202, 376.

Burgaleses, or Maravedis Blancos, 322.

Burgundian gulden, 82.

Burgundy nobles, 56.

Byzants, 2.

C.

Cadières, 400.

Cardacues (see Quart d'écu), 148.

Carls d'or or Louis d'or, 388.

Carolino (or Barile), 307.

Carolus, 115, 348, 356, 375.

Castellanos, 323, 325, 334, 335, 336. (See Doblas, Oro.)

Centenes, 339.

Chaise d'or, 35.

Chaises or masses, 400, 408, 409, 410, 411. (See Double.)

Convention thaler, 201, 378.

Cornado, 325.

" viejo, 325, 326.

" nuevo, 325, 326.

Coronados, 323.

Coronas, 109, 325, 334.

Couronne, 400, 401, 408. (See Blanc, Écu, Crown, Gros.)

Crazie, 309.

Croiseth. (See Douzains, Écu.)

Crown (see French crowns), 113, 231, 243, 376, 383.

" of the Rose, 216.

" of the Sun, 109, 116, 117, 119, 401.

" or Brabant thaler, 202.

" thaler, 202.

Cruzados, 326.

" de la Banda, 326.

D.

Denarii (pfennige), 360.

Denarius, 2.

Denaro, 319.

Denier d'or à l'aignel or Aignel d'or, 399.

" d'or à l'écu, 400.

" d'or aux Fleurs de lis, 35.

" Parisis, 415, 416, 417.

" Tournois, 415.

Deniers (silver), 346. (See Gros.)

Dinero nuevo, 325, 326.

" viejo, 325, 326.

Doblas, 323, 325, 326, 334.

" (Castellanos) de la Banda, 24, 325, 326.

Doblon, 329, 338.

Dollar (see Piece of Eight, Rixdollar, Daalder, Spanish, Staten), 149, 221, 222, 238, 247, 248, 250, 251, 253, 260, 262.

Double (see Grand) carolus, 115.

" florin, 347.

" gold gulden, 375.

" Parisis, 417.

" Pattart, 347.

" Tournois, 417.

Doubles or chaises, 410.

Douzains, 86, 170, 422.

" à la croisette, 422.

Drittelthaler, 213.

Ducados, 325, 326, 334.

Ducat (see Hungary, Holland, Nederland, Imperial, Silver, Spanish), 101, 116, 117, 120, 271, 311, 349, 350, 351, 369, 370, 371, 374, 390, 391, 392.

" (Kremnitz), 387.

" (see Zecchino, or Sequin), 314, 316, 317.

" (silver) 318.

Ducato d'argento, 312.

" d'oro, 308.

Dukaat, 353, 354, 358.

Dukaton of Brabant, 357.

Duro, 333.

E.

Eagle, 253.

Écu (see Blanc, Escudos, Scudo, Florin), 86, 88, 90, 92, 406, 408, 409, 414, 423.

" à la couronne, 401, 402, 410, 411, 412.

" à la croisette, 412.

" au porc-épi, 402, 412.

" au soleil, 84, 412, 413.

" blancs, 167.

" heaumes, 402, 410.

" (silver), 169.

Écu d'or, 37, 85, 413. (See Denier.)

" au soleil, 401, 402.

Eight-florin (gold), 376.

English crown, 247.

" rose nobles, 81.

" sovereigns, 81.

Enrique, 325, 327.

Escudos, 109, 331, 334, 335, 336, 337, 338.

" de plata, 330. (See Scudo, Écu.)

Esterlings, 41.

Excellentes, 327. (See Medios.)

" de la Granada, 328, 334.

" majores, 334.

Fifty-stuiver piece, 352, 357.

Fiorino d'argento, 306. (See Florin, Lira, Silver.)

" da sei, 309.

" d'oro, 308.

" d'oro largo, 303, 304.

" d'oro largo in oro, 303, 304, 308.

" di suggello, 302, 304.

" neri, 309.

" nuovastro, 308.

" nuovissimo or Largo di Galea, 308.

" nuovo, 308.

" of the first suggello, 308.

" of the second suggello, 308.

" of the fifth suggello, 308.

" of the sixth suggello, 308.

" of the eighth suggello, 308.

" of the ninth suggello, 308.

" of the Pisan weight, 308.

" stretto, 308.

" stretto di Camera of the seventh suggello, 308.

Five-franc (silver), 174, 192, 194, 195.

" thaler pieces, 204.

Fleur de lys, or Florins d'or aux Fleurs de lis, 401, 409, 410. (See Blanc, Denier, Gros.)

" de lys of Charles V., 402.

" de lys of King John, 402.

Florences, 9. (See Florin.)

Florentine florin, 389. (See Florin.)

" gigliati, 375.

Florin (see Double, Petit, Fiorino, Oro, S. Andries, Florences), 3, 269, 302, 326, 334, 347, 377.

" d'Aragon, 325, 326.

" de écu, 411.

" d'or, 9, 26, 299.

" " aux Fleur de lis, or Fleurs de lis d'or, 401.

" George, 400.

" of eight. (See Eight-florin.)

Forty-franc (gold), 175, 176.

Four-florin gold pieces, 376.

" penny piece (silver), 146.

Franc (see Five-franc), 174, 176, 192, 194, 195, 353, 404, 410, 414, 422, 423.

" à cheval, 401, 411.

" à pied, 401.

" d'argent, 404.

" d'oro, 36, 399, 400, 401.

French crowns, 66, 80.

Friedrichs d'or, 204, 380, 381, 382, 388, 392.

G.

Galema (see Blanc), 422.

Genoviva, 4.

George. (See Florin.)

German gold guldens, 79.

Gigliati, 375. (See Florentine.)

Gold crowns, 376.

" ducat, 390, 391.

" dukaat, 353.

" florin, 302.

" gulden (Rheinische gulden), 31, 98, 363, 365, 367, 368, 369, 371, 389, 390, 391. (See Gulden.)

" penning, 359.

Grand blanc, 421.

" double, 347.

Groat, 113, 117, 118, 119.

Groots, 345, 347.

Gros (see Royal, Blanc, Deniers, Couronne, Groschen, Groat, Grossi), 347, 418, 420, 421.

" à la couronne, 416, 418.

" à la Fleur de lis, 416.

" à la l'estoile, 419.

" blancs, 418, 419.

" d'argent, 37, 420, 421.

" deniers blancs, 403.

" deniers d'argent, 403.

" royaux, 400, 408.

" royaux d'or, 10.

" Tournois, 28, 403, 415, 416, 417, 420.

Groschen (see Gros, Gulden, Marien, Reichs, Silver), 28, 30, 97, 363, 364, 365, 366, 372, 375, 379, 380, 394, 395.

" of the mark, 366.

" of Misnia and Franconia, 366.

Grosseti, 307.

Grossi, 20, 304, 306, 307, 311, 312, 318. (See Lira, Gros.)

" à oro, 315.

" popolini, 306.

Grossoni, 306, 307.

Gueldres. (See Riders.)

Guelfi, 304.

" del fiore, 19, 306.

" grossi, 22, 306.

" nuovi, 20, 306.

Guillaumes d'or, 271.

Guinea, 135, 231, 247.

Gulden (see Burgundian, Double, Gold gulden, Karolus, Misnia, Reichs, Rhenish, Silver, Three-gulden), 7, 15, 27, 96, 99, 101, 345, 348, 350, 352, 353, 354, 357, 361, 362, 367, 369, 375, 392.

" groschen, 363, 365, 368.

Guldener, 372.

H.

Half-crown, 232, 243, 383.

" dollar, 259.

Hard dollar, 333.

Heaumes. (See Écu.)

Heller, 361, 362.

Henris, 412.

" d'or, 402.

Holland dukaat, 358, 374.

Hungary ducat, 358.

I.

Imperial ducat, 392.

J.

Joachims thaler or Schlicken or Löwen thaler, 363.

K.

Kammer Gerichts gulden, 369.

Karolus gulden, 356.

Kremnitz ducat, 375, 387, 392.

Kreutzers, 99, 361, 364, 365, 367, 369, 372, 375.

Kronen thaler or Brabant thaler, 378.

Kruisdaalder or Patacon, 356, 357.

L.

Laubthalers, 202.

Leeuwendaalder, 356, 357.

Leones, 321.

L'estoile. (See Gros.)

Lion, 408.

Lira, 305, 310, 312, 313, 314, 318, 400.

" à fiorino, 305.

" di grossi, 314, 315.

" di piccioli, 315.

" (Florentine), 301.

" Tron, 312.

Lis d'argent, 92, 404.

" d'or, 93, 402.

Livres d'argent, 406, 423.

Louis d'argent, 167, 168, 169, 404, 406, 407, 422, 423.

" d'or, 91, 92, 93, 167, 168, 169, 172, 227, 402, 405, 406, 407, 413, 414.

" d'or or Carls d'or, 388.

Löwen thaler or Joachims thaler or Schlicken thaler, 363.

Luxembourgs, 44.

M.

Maravedis, 15, 320, 321.

" blancos or Burgaleses, 322.

" blancos segundos, 323.

" de los buenos, 323.

" de moneda blanca, 324.

" negros or prietos, 322.

" nuevo, 326.

" viejos or moneda blanca, 322, 323, 325.

Marien groschen, 102, 366.

Max d'or, 375.

Masses or chaises, 400, 408.

Meaja. (See Moneda.)

Medios excellentes, 334.

Metales or mitgales, 321.

Milreis, 273.

Minuto, 310.

Misnian gulden, 369.

Mitgales or metales, 321.

Molino, 344.

Moneda blanca or Maravedis blancas viejos, 322. (See Blanca.)

" meaja nueva, 325, 326.

" vieja, 322, 325, 326.

Moneta bianca nera, 305.

" nera, 305.

Mouton, 36, 409, 410, 411. (See Petit.)

" d'or, 10.

" d'or à la grand laine, 399.

" d'or à la petite laine, 399.

N.

Nederland dukaat, 357, 358, 359.

" reaal, 356.

" rijder, 357, 358, 359.

" rijksdaalder, 356, 357.

Netherland stuyvers, 366.

Nobles, 48, 53, 55, 57. (See Rose Nobels, Burgundian.)

Novenes, 322, 323.

Nuovi Guelfi, 20, 306.

O.

Obole blanche, 416.

Oro dobla castellana, 23.

" florines, 10.

" gran modulo, 23.

Orth, 365.

P.

Parisis, 400, 408. (See Denier, double.)

" d'argent, 403.

Parvulus, 310.

Parvus, 310.

Pastas de oro, 337.

Patacon or Kruisdaalder, 357.

Pattart, 347. (See Double.)

Pavilion, 400, 408.

Penny, 2, 4, 113.

Penning (gold), 352, 359.

Pesetas, 333.

Petit blanc, 421.

" deniers tournois, 37.

" florins, 42.

" moutons, 410.

" royaux, 10, 400, 408.

" royaux d'or, 9.

" royaux d'or fin, 399.

" tournois, 415.

Pfennige, 362, 365, 366, 369, 372, 375.

Philipps thaler, 101, 368, 370.

Philippus rijder, 82.

Piastre, 333.

Piccioli, 309, 310, 311, 315. (See Lira.)

" à oro, 315.

" neri, 309.

Piece of eight (see real and dollar), 148, 221, 222, 246.

Pistole, 87, 131, 203, 227, 381, 382, 388. (See Spanish, Louis d'or, Friedrichs d'or.)

Pistolets, 148.

Popolini, 306. (See Grossi.)

Porc-épi. (See Écu.)

Pound, 113, 345.

Prietos or Maravedises negros, 322.

Prussian thaler, 203, 380.

Q.

Quart d'écu, 404, 422. (See Cardacues.)

Quattrini, 309.

" bianchi. 309.

" lanajuoli, 309.

" neri, 94.

Quinto di ducato, 307.

Quinzains, 406.

" d'or, 413.

R.

Real (see Nederland, Royal, Ryal), 87, 95, 115, 324, 325, 327, 333.

" au lion, 10.

" of eight, 131, 143, 329, 341, 342, 344. (See Piece of Eight.)

" sencillo, 340, 341.

" (silver), 326, 328.

Reichs gulden, 367. (See Gulden.)

" gulden thaler, 370.

" groschen (see Groschen), 365, 366, 367.

" thaler (see Thaler), 101, 103, 199, 200, 368, 369, 370, 371, 372, 374.

Reines, 400.

Rhenish gulden (see Gold Gulden), 31.

Rhenish albi, 366.

Riders Gelderns, 119. (See Rijder.)

Rijder, 349, 352. (See Nederland, Philippus, Rider, Silver.)

Rijksdaalder, 83, 354. (See Nederland.)

Rixdollars, 148. (See Rijksdaalder.)

Rose nobel, 113. (See Nobel.)

Royal, 399, 410, 411, 412. (See Gros, Petit, Reines, Real, Ryal.)

" double, 408.

Royaux durs, 400.

" or Denier d'or au Roiel, 346, 400.

Rupee, 295.

Ryals, 142, 143. (See Real.)

S.

Saint Andries florin, 347.

Saluts, 401, 411.

Schellings, 345.

Schlicken thaler or Joachim thaler or Löwen thaler, 363.

Schillingen (solidi), 360, 361, 362. (See Silver.)

Scudo, 318. (See Écu.)

" d'argento, 313.

Sequin (see Ducat, Zecchino), 311, 312, 316, 317.

Seven-kreutzer piece, 375.

Seventeen-kreutzer piece, 375.

Shilling, 113, 138, 142, 144, 145, 231, 243.

" of esterlings, 55.

Sigillo. (See Fiorino.)

Silver dukaat, 353.

" fiorino, 301, 304.

" groschen, 102, 380.

" gulden or thaler, 364.

" rijder, 353.

" schillingen,

Six-livre thalers, 202.

Sixpence, 144, 145, 231, 243.

Soldi, 301, 304. (See Solidi.)

" grossi, 306.

" (schillingen), 360.

Soleil. (See Écu, Couronne.)

Solidus, 398. (See Soldi, Schelling Sol, Sueldo.)

Sols, 170. (See Solidi, Sueldo.)

" d'argent, 403.

" d'or, 399.

Souverain, 392.

Sovereign, 113, 117, 131.

Spanish dollar, 333.

" ducats, 79.

" pistole, 80.

Specie or Convention thaler, 102, 201.

Staten daalder, 356.

Sterlings, 48.

Stiver, 345. (See Nederland.)

Stretti. (See Fiorino.)

Sueldo, 319. (See Solidus.)

" de oro, 321.

" pepiones, 321, 322.

Suggello. (See Fiorino.)

T.

Ten-gulden piece, 353, 355, 359.

Ten-stiver piece, 356.

Ten-thaler piece, 204.

Testoons, 84, 121, 130, 307, 403, 422.

Thaler (see Silver gulden, Joachims thaler, Kronen thaler, Laubthalers, Prussian, Philipps, Reichs thaler, Silver, Six-livre, Vereins thaler), 83, 106, 363, 364, 367, 369, 370, 371, 373, 375, 377, 379, 381, 382, 392.

Three-gulden piece or Bavarian carolus, 357, 375.

Three-heller piece, 369.

Threepenny piece (silver), 146.

Thirty-deniers, 170.

Thirty-kreutzer piece, 375.

Tollero, 313, 318.

Tournois, 397. (See Denier, Double, Gros, Petit.)

Tremissis or triens, 398.

Tron. (See Lira.)

Twenty-franc (gold), 175, 176.

Twenty-kreutzer piece, 375.

Twenty-shilling piece, 149.

Two-franc, 190.

Twopenny piece (silver), 146.

U.

Unite, 113, 134.

V.

Veintenes, 331.

" de oro, 337.

Vellon rico, 344.

Vereinsmunze, 206.

Vereins thaler, 216, 372.

Viejos, 323. (See Maravedi.)

W.

Wilhelms d'or, 388.

William, 354.

Z.

Zähender, 365.

Zecchino (see Ducat, Sequin), 4, 311, 314, 375.

[Transcriber's Notes:

There are many possible inaccuracies in the non-English references in this book. The non-English portions are left as printed, unless noted below.

The following errors in the original text were corrected:

Some fractions, such as 67-47/41 on page 314 have a numerator larger than the denominator. Even though these are most likely incorrect, they are left as in the original as there is no way to confirm what they should be.

Page XIX, Preface: "Dei Münzen der deutschen" corrected to "Die Münzen der deutschen"

Page XXX, Table of Contents, Chapter III: "recoinage of, 1696, 222;" corrected to "recoinage of 1696, 222;"

Page 5, Chapter 1: "in order to the supply of the Italian mints" corrected to "in order to supply the Italian mints"

Page 7, Chapter 1: "the Archbishop of Cologne the Duke of Brabant" corrected to "the Archbishop of Cologne, the Duke of Brabant"

Page 8, Chapter 1: "50 marks 2 oz. 3-1/2 aug." corrected to "50 marks 2 oz. 3-1/2 ang."

Page 79, Chapter 2, in the table "German Gold Guldens:" "1591" corrected to "1581" to match right hand column and date sequence.

Page 87, Chapter 2: "Spanish and Portugese gold ducats" corrected to "Spanish and Portuguese gold ducats"

Page 89, Chapter 2: "the celebrated declaration of 1577, i.e 60 sols." corrected to "the celebrated declaration of 1577, i.e. 60 sols."

Page 141, Chapter 2: "The merchant-adventurers were appealed to to buy up these stocks, but they were unable." corrected to "The merchant-adventurers were appealed to, to buy up these stocks, but they were unable."

Page 155, Chapter 3, in untitled table: second occurrence of "1841-1850" corrected to "1851-1855" to match sequence in table.

Page 169, Chapter 3: "a value of 20 livres; and of silver ecus at 8-3/10 to the" corrected to "a value of 20 livres; and of silver écus at 8-3/10 to the" as écus has the accent on every other occurrence.

Page 176, Chapter 3: "It is on the same conideration" corrected to "It is on the same consideration"

Page 184, Chapter 3: Table header "Silver. (Francs)." corrected to "Silver (Francs)." to match format in other headers and other tables.

Page 198, Chapter 3: "--Franconia, Bavaria, and Suabia--" corrected to "--Franconia, Bavaria, and Swabia--"

Page 206, Chapter 3: "Schwanzburg-Rudolstadt (Unterherrschaft)" corrected to "Schwarzburg-Rudolstadt (Unterherrschaft)"

Page 207, Chapter 3: "each state to give an account of its mintings," corrected to "each state to give an account of its mintings."

Page 219, Chapter 3: heading "England" corrected to "England." to match other headers.

Page 233, Chapter 3: "On this occassion I addressed a letter to a noble Lord," corrected to "On this occasion I addressed a letter to a noble Lord,"

Page 246, Chapter 3: "the ounce of silver was declared worth 6s. 8d" corrected to "the ounce of silver was declared worth 6s. 8d."

Page 251, Chapter 3: "that gold was extremely over-valued in the United" corrected to "that gold was extremely overvalued in the United" as all other occurrences of overvalued are not hyphenated.

Page 287, Chapter 3: "by substituting silver coin or notes based on silver" corrected to "by substituting silver coins or notes based on silver"

Page 294, Chapter 3: "history of the world has been characterstic and uniform" corrected to "history of the world has been characteristic and uniform"

Pages 325 appears to be a continuation of the table on page 326. These pages reversed by transcriber.

Page 326, Appendix III: "Cornados viejos" corrected to "Coronados viejos"

Page 353, Appendix IV: "1 gulden 2 francs 11-61/100 centimes." corrected to "1 gulden = 2 francs 11-61/100 centimes."

Page 364, Appendix V: "The third Imperial Mint Ordinance established an important difference from this system," corrected to "The third Imperial Mint Ordinance established an important difference from this system."

Page 369, Appendix V:

"Pfennige 3 " 720"" corrected to "Pfennige, 3 " 720""

Page 393, Appendix V: The following 2 dates were a best guess based on the text. The dates were obviously incorrect.

"1855, Frankfort Fair--Philipps thaler = 82 kr." corrected to "1585, Frankfort Fair--Philipps thaler = 82 kr."

"1623 (Higher Circles)--Reichs thaler recognised at 90 kr." corrected to "1603 (Higher Circles)--Reichs thaler recognised at 90 kr."

Page 404, Appendix VI: "15 sols (i.e. a quarter the value of the écu d'or, then set at 60 sols)" corrected to "15 sols. (i.e. a quarter the value of the écu d'or, then set at 60 sols.)"

Page 407, Appendix VI: "1626 they had fallen to 12 livres and 3 livres respectively." corrected to "1726 they had fallen to 12 livres and 3 livres respectively."

Page 408, Appendix VI: "1329 (Philipp de Valois), Dec. 26" corrected to "1329 (Philippe de Valois), Dec. 26"

Page 411, Appendix VI: "Écu á la" corrected to "Écu à la" under 1425 and 1427

Page 412, Appendix VI: "1487 (Charles VII.)" corrected to "1487 (Charles VII.),"

Page 425, General Index: "Calonne XV., 172." corrected to "Calonne, XV., 172."

"Chambers, Mr., 259." corrected to "Chambres, Mr., 259."

Page 427, General Index: "Freemantle, Sir C.W., 283, 290." corrected to "Fremantle, Sir C.W., 283, 290."

Page 431, Index of Coins: "Angelets, 117." corrected to "Angellets, 117."

"à l'ecu, 420." corrected to "à l'écu, 420." as l'écu is accented on page 420.

Page 432, Index of Coins: "Dukaton of Brabant, 357" spelled "Dakaton of Brabant" on page 357. Don't know which is correct. Both left as printed.

Header starting F was added.

"di sugello, 302, 304." corrected to "di suggello, 302, 304."

Page 433, Index of Coins: "Florens d'or aux Fleurs de lis" corrected to "Florins d'or aux Fleurs de lis"

"Gigliali, 375. (See Florentine.)" corrected to "Gigliati, 375. (See Florentine.)"

"Grosseti, 307." spelled as "Grossetti" on page 307. Don't know which is correct, both left as printed.

Page 434, Index of Coins: "Joachims thaler or Schlicken o Löwen thaler, 363." correct to "Joachims thaler or Schlicken or Löwen thaler, 363."

Page 435, Index of Coins: "Nobles, 48, 53, 55, 57. (See Rose Nobels, Burgundian.)" corrected to "Nobles, 48, 53, 55, 57. (See Rose Nobles, Burgundian.)"

Page 436, Index of Coins: "Riders Gelderns, 119. (See Rijder.)" Gelderns spelled as "Gelderus" on page 119. Don't know which is correct, both left as printed.

"of esterlings, 55." ditto mark added to represent Shilling

]