The pounds, shillings, and pence which served for the simple reckonings
of our fathers, have entailed upon us a highly complicated system of
accounts since we have become a great commercial people. Steam-engines,
locomotives, and electric telegraphs have multiplied our transactions a
hundredfold, but no adequate labour-saving machinery has been introduced
into the counting-house, where the value of these transactions has to be
recorded and adjusted. The simple and scientific method of computation
by what is called the decimal system, is used at this moment, we are
told, by more than half the human race. Not only has it been by law
established in most of the countries of Europe, but throughout the great
empires of China and Russia; it is penetrating the Ottoman Empire; it
has obtained a footing in Persia and Egypt; and it is universal in the
United States of America, whence it has made its way into several other
transatlantic states. Among ourselves, the thing is approved and admired
in the abstract, but we dread the trouble it would give us to fall into
a method to which we are unaccustomed; and we apprehend, on very
insufficient grounds, that much confusion would arise during the
transition. Moreover, it is to be feared that out of a spirit of
prejudice or contradiction, many would not, even under the penalties of
law, adopt the change. At this moment, as is well known, certain classes
of people persist in selling corn and other articles by old local
measures, although at the risk of prosecution. Thus, in Scotland, we
still hear of firlots, bolls, and mutchkins, notwithstanding that these
antiquated measures were abolished upwards of twenty years ago. In
short, it would appear that the change of popular denominations in
weights, measures, and moneys, is one of the things which the law, in
ordinary circumstances, has great difficulty in reaching.
This difficulty, however, ought not to be deemed insuperable. The boon
given to society by the decimal system is worth struggling for. On this
account, it appears highly desirable that the people at large should be
made thoroughly acquainted with its principles, and be able to weigh the
advantages against the difficulties of such a change. Some years ago,
the subject was pretty fully discussed in several literary and
commercial periodicals; and recently, Mr Taylor's little work[1] has
presented it in a more permanent form. Our own pages appear particularly
suitable for giving wide circulation to a familiar and popular
exposition of the subject.
The ancients used certain letters to represent numbers, and we still
employ the Roman numeral characters as the most elegant way of
expressing a date in typography or sculpture; but every one must see
what a tedious business the calculation of large sums would be according
to this cumbrous system of notation: nor is it easy to say whereabouts
our commercial status, to say nothing of science, would have been
to-day, had it never been superseded. The Romans themselves, in
computing large numbers, always had recourse to the abacus--a
counting-frame with balls on parallel wires, somewhat similar to that
now used in infant-schools.
It was a great step gained, and a most important preparation for
clearing away the darkness of the middle ages by the light of science,
when between the eighth and thirteenth centuries the use of the
characters 1, 2, 3, &c. was generally established in Europe, having been
received from Eastern nations, long accustomed to scientific
computations. The great advantage of these numbers is, that they proceed
on the decimal system--that is, they denote different values according
to their relative places, each character signifying ten times more
accordingly as it occupies a place higher. Thus 8, in the first place to
the right, is simply 8; but in the next to the left, it is 80; in the
third, 800; and in the fourth, 8000. Yet we do not require to grasp
these large numbers in our thought, but deal with each figure as a
simple unit, and subject it to every arithmetical process without even
adverting to its real value. To some, it may seem superfluous to explain
a matter so familiar; but we have met with many who know pretty well how
to use our system of notation mechanically, yet do not know, or rather
have not thought of the beautifully simple principle on which it
proceeds--that of decimal ascension.
Now, we want to see the same principle applied to the gradations of our
money, weights, and measures. Instead of our complicated denominations
of money--namely, pounds, each containing twenty shillings, these each
divisible into twelve pence, and these again into four farthings--we
want a scale in which _ten_ of each denomination would amount to _one_
of that immediately above it, as in our notation. And instead of our
complicated system of weights and measures, we want one similarly
graduated system--each measure and weight rising ten times above the
former. All calculations of prices would then be made by simple
multiplication. What a gala-day for school-boys when the pence and
shilling table would be abolished by act of parliament, and there would
no longer be the table of avoirdupois-weight to learn, nor troy-weight,
nor apothecaries', nor long-measure, nor square-measure, nor
cloth-measure, nor liquid-measure, nor dry-measure, but one decimal
scale of weights and measures would suffice for every commodity, and
there would only be their names to get by heart in order! Every one sees
that there would be an astonishing simplification in this system of
reckoning by tens--that the study of arithmetic would be immensely
facilitated, and the business of the counting-house divested of puzzling
calculations. Let us see whereabouts we are in the way towards its
attainment.
About ten years ago, a parliamentary commission on the subject of
weights and measures, advised the adoption of a decimal scale, but
recommended as a preliminary step, the decimation of the Coinage.
Regarding it as important, however, that great deference should be paid
to existing circumstances, and that the present relative notions of
value, so deeply rooted in the public mind, should be disturbed as
little as possible, they pointed out the facilities existing in our
present coinage for a re-arrangement on the decimal plan. They said that
the pound might be preserved precisely on the present footing, and thus
would be maintained in name the price of everything above twenty
shillings in value. They remarked that the farthing, which is the 960th
part of L.1, might be set down as the 1000th, which would be a variation
of 4 per cent. only--somewhat less than that to which copper is liable
from fluctuation of price. We have thus the units at the one end of the
scale, and the thousands at the other; it remains only to interpose the
tens and hundreds between them, by introducing a florin as the tenth of
a pound, and a cent--equal to 2-1/2d. nearly--as the tenth of the
florin. Adopting these views, the following would be the new and simple
scale of money-reckoning:--ten millets, 1 cent; ten cents, 1 florin; ten
florins, L.1.
Nothing was done, however, in following up these recommendations, till
the subject was brought before the House of Commons by Dr John Bowring,
in 1847. The consequence of his appeal was, that a coin denominated a
florin, and representing the tenth of a pound, was struck, and put in
circulation. It was, however, considered 'an unfortunate specimen of
Royal Mint art,' and the issue was discontinued, though a few specimens
still linger unforbidden among us. The matter is thus at a stand-still,
and may probably not be agitated again till the people generally are
more impressed with its importance, and disposed to urge it on the
legislature.
The first thing wanted is obviously an abundant issue of acceptable
florins. No matter though the coin be recognised by the ignorant as a
two-shilling piece, rather than as the tenth of a pound; it is a decimal
coin with which they may become familiar without disturbing their old
ideas and modes of reckoning. The single step that would then remain to
be taken is the decisive one--the introduction of the coin equivalent to
one-tenth of a florin, accompanied by the withdrawal of the
representatives of duodecimal division, and a legislative enactment that
all accounts kept in public offices, or rendered in private
transactions, should be in the decimal denominations.
The only difficulty which has appalled the advocates of the decimal
system, is with respect to the cent-piece. It is said to be too small
for a silver coin, too large for a copper, and mixed metals find no
favour at the Mint. But if it is to be a denomination in accounts, it
must have a representative coin, and a silver cent could be very little
smaller than our present 3d.-piece. 'The great mass of the people,' says
Mr Norton (a correspondent of the _Athenæum_ on this subject), 'will not
adopt an abstraction; you must give them something which they can see,
handle, and call by name, if you wish them to take notice of it in their
reckonings.' Mr Taylor, and some other writers, have proposed to evade
this difficulty by passing over the cents altogether, and counting only
by pounds, florins, and millets. The French, say they, have in theory a
decimally graduated scale, yet they always reckon by francs, and cents,
which are 100ths of francs; the intervening decime being ignored in
practice. So, likewise, the Americans have the dollar, the dime (its
tenth part), the cent (its hundredth), and the mill (its thousandth).
'It is now nearly thirty years,' says Mr John Quincy Adams, in his
report to Congress in 1821, 'since our new moneys of account have been
established. The dollar and the cent have become familiarised to the
tongue, but the dime and the mill are so utterly unknown, that now, when
the recent coinage of dimes is alluded to, it is always necessary to
inform the reader that they are ten-cent pieces. Ask a tradesman in any
of our cities what is a dime or a mill, and the chances are four in five
that he will not understand your question.' This, however, we cannot
help considering one of the greatest inconveniences of transatlantic and
continental reckonings. We are accustomed to talk of amounts in as small
numbers as possible; and one of the great advantages we see in decimal
gradations is, that we should never have a number above 9, except in
pounds. There is something not only troublesome but indefinite, in the
idea of ten and twenty in comparison with one and two; and a French
account in francs bewilders us when it amounts to thousands and
millions. Probably the half and quarter francs of France, and the half
and quarter dollars of America, have been the means of exploding the
decimals next below them; and on this ground we differ from those who
plead for the continuance of our present shillings and sixpences, as
half and quarter florins. The shilling is a coin so inseparably
connected with 12 and 20, that no decimal system will obtain while it
exists. It is useless to say, that it would be retained only as a
circulation coin, and not as a denomination in accounts; for so long as
we have it at all, we will certainly reckon from it and by it. For
purposes of common barter, there ought to be a two-cent piece, a
four-cent, and perhaps a seven-cent; and thus we shall be compelled to
_think decimally_. 'If it is worth while to alter at all,' says Mr
Taylor, 'ought we not to go the whole required length, and aim without
timidity at the possession of a scale complete at once within itself,
and so escape an indefinite prolongation of the purgatory of transition?
In a change like the one under consideration, the work of pulling down
an old system is far more difficult than that of building up another,
and every prop must be removed before it will fall.'
With respect to the copper coins, there seems to be no hurry about
disturbing them. It appears that the Dutch stiver and the French sou
have maintained their place in spite of legislation. So, probably, would
the English penny, and properly enough as a 4-millet piece. We fear our
poor people would feel it to be an attempt to mystify them, were the
government to withdraw this familiar coin and substitute a 5-millet
piece, as some have recommended, for the sake of establishing a binary
division of the cent. It would, doubtless, be considered desirable, as
an ulterior measure, to have a more exact copper coinage, marked as one
millet, two millets, and four millets; but when we have, without
scruple, passed as the twelfth part of a shilling the Irish penny, which
is really only the thirteenth part, we may, in the meantime, use our
present copper money, which will differ only a twenty-fifth from the new
value attached to it--a discrepancy of no consequence, except to the
holders of large quantities, from whom the Mint would be bound to
receive it back at the value it bore when issued. These coppers,
however, ought not to be used beyond the value of the cent, for then
would arise the confusion of dealing with the 100 millets in the florin,
or what would popularly be termed an odd half-penny in every shilling.
For the same reason, the adjustment of prices, in order to be equitable,
should be calculated downwards from the pound and florin, not upwards
from the penny. Thus, if a labourer's wages have been 1s. 3d. a day, his
employer must not say that 15 pence are 60 farthings--that is, 6 cents;
but 1s. 3d. is five-eighths of a florin, which amount to about 6 cents 2
millets.
Such is the plan which has been officially laid down for a decimal
coinage, and such the steps needful to carry it out. The only scheme we
have seen which materially differs from it is that of Mr H. Norton. He
selects for the highest denomination the half-sovereign, and proposes to
call it a ducat. The shilling, as now in use, would then be the second
denomination; the third, he proposes, should be a cent, equal to about
1-1/5th of a penny, and which, he says, would be fairly represented by
our large unmilled pennies, if newly christened; the fourth denomination
to be a 'rap,' the tenth of the cent, and somewhat less than half a
farthing. The great advantage adduced in favour of this scale is, that
it would be much more likely than the other to secure general adoption.
The removal of the pound, he says, affects chiefly the higher and
educated classes; it leaves the shilling, which is the staple and
standard for the masses, and also the penny, with slight alteration,
accompanied by the utter removal of the old one. It is also said, that a
half-farthing piece would be a great boon to the poor, especially in
Ireland. The circumstances alleged in recommendation of this scale, are
just what appear to us to be its defects. The continuance of the poor
man's penny would not appear a boon if he found there were to be only
ten of them for a shilling; especially as many small articles, which
were a penny before, would probably be a penny still, the dealers not
finding it convenient to adjust the fraction. We well remember the
dissatisfaction of the poorer classes in Ireland at the equalisation of
the currency in 1825. Hitherto, the native silver coins had been 5d. and
10d. pieces, a British shilling had been a thirteen-penny, and a
half-crown, 2s. 8-1/2d. This half-crown was the usual breakfast-money of
gentlemen's servants--that is, their weekly allowance for purchasing
everything except dinner. When the servant now went to the huckster's,
and got, as heretofore, 6d. worth of bread, 9d. worth of tea, 4d. worth
of sugar, and 5d. worth of butter, there was only 6d. of change to buy
another loaf in the middle of the week, instead of 8-1/2d., which was
wont to afford, we will not say what, over and above. It is for a
similar reason that we say, if there remain anything which can be either
identified or confounded with a penny, it should be lowered rather than
raised in value. Small prices are not easily adjusted, and the
temptation in the other case lies on the side of the dealer not to alter
them. It is more certain, for instance, that a baker will take care to
divide 2s. worth of bread into twenty-five penny-loaves, when a penny
comes to be the twenty-fifth of a florin, than that he will divide 1s.
worth into ten only, if a penny become the tenth of a shilling. And it
would be less hardship for the poor housekeeper to find her penny-loaf
1-25th smaller, if she could discern the reduction, than to get only ten
for her shilling, even if they were a fifth larger. Besides, we should
feel it to be a poverty-stricken thought, that our internal commerce
should be reduced to barter in half-farthings' worths, and that our
merchants and bankers should have no denomination above the value of
10s. for the enormous sums which figure in their books.
The subject of names is worth a remark or two. The commissioners
recommended 'florins,' as affording facilities to foreigners for
understanding our monetary system; and in this respect it has
advantages. 'Cent' and 'millet' are easily enunciated, and they convey
to the educated classes, whether at home or abroad, the relative value
of the coins. We cannot say, however, but we would prefer a more
familiar nomenclature than florins, cents, and millets. Mr Norton's
suggestion, that the names should not only be capable of easy and rapid
utterance, but that they should be of the same Teutonic origin as our
shilling and penny, is worthy of serious consideration. Dr Bowring, who
advocated a strictly decimal scale, suggested the names, 'queens' and
'victorias' for the two middle denominations, leaving pounds and
farthings as they were. Now, if it be deemed proper to change the name
of the unfortunate florin when it makes its reappearance, 'queen' would
be a very pretty substitute; but 'victoria' would soon be mangled down
to its first syllable. If this style of nomenclature be preferred,
'prince' would be a more suitable name for the little cent-piece. Mr De
Morgan is for 'pounds, royals, groats, and farthings.'
But 'royal' is not capable of rapid enunciation, and 'groat' is
decidedly objectionable for designating ten farthings, as it is still
sacred to fourpence in the English mind. Whatever the names, the full
enunciation of them at first would appear stiff and solemn; but
abbreviated modes of expression would soon be established. 'Four-two'
would be understood as L.4, 2 (florins), while 'four and two' would
convey four florins, two cents. When three denominations were used, it
would be 'four-three-two,' there being little danger of a
misunderstanding as to whether the 'four' were pounds or florins. So, in
writing, it would only be necessary to write after any sum the name of
the lowest denomination, as 48, 3, 7c., which would be known as L.48, 3
florins, 7 cents; or, to add ciphers for all lower denominations, as
48300, which, whether pointed or not, would convey L.48, 3, 0, 0.
In a future paper, we will resume the subject of decimals, viewing it
with reference to weights and measures; when its advantages will more
fully appear, by the facility it affords for the calculation of prices.