I thought this reasoning necessary in order to give some light to a

philosophical question which has been much disputed in Britain. I call

it a philosophical question, not a political one; for whatever may

be the consequence of such a miraculous transformation of mankind as

would endow them with every species of virtue and free them from every

species of vice, this concerns not the magistrate, who aims only at

possibilities. He cannot cure every vice by substituting a virtue in

its place. Very often he can only cure one vice by another, and in that

case he ought to prefer what is least pernicious to society. Luxury,

when excessive, is the source of many ills; but it is in general

preferable to sloth and idleness, which would commonly succeed in its

place, and are more pernicious both to private persons and to the

public. When sloth reigns, a mean, uncultivated way of life prevails

amongst individuals, without society, without enjoyment. And if the

sovereign, in such a situation, demands the service of his subjects,

the labour of the state suffices only to furnish the necessaries of

life to the labourers, and can afford nothing to those who are employed

in the public service.

NOTES, OF REFINEMENT IN THE ARTS.

[10] The inscription on the Place de Vendôme says 440,000.

[11] _Fable of the Bees._

OF MONEY.

Money is not, properly speaking, one of the subjects of commerce,

but only the instrument which men have agreed upon to facilitate

the exchange of one commodity for another. It is none of the wheels

of trade; it is the oil which renders the motion of the wheels more

smooth and easy. If we consider any one kingdom by itself, it is

evident that the greater or less plenty of money is of no consequence,

since the prices of commodities are always proportioned to the plenty

of money, and a crown in Henry VII.’s time served the same purpose

as a pound does at present. It is only the public which draws any

advantage from the greater plenty of money, and that only in its wars

and negotiations with foreign states. And this is the reason why all

rich and trading countries, from Carthage to Britain and Holland,

have employed mercenary troops, which they hired from their poorer

neighbours. Were they to make use of their native subjects, they would

find less advantage from their superior riches, and from their great

plenty of gold and silver, since the pay of all their servants must

rise in proportion to the public opulence. Our small army in Britain of

20,000 men is maintained at as great expense as a French army thrice

as numerous. The English fleet, during the late war, required as much

money to support it as all the Roman legions which kept the whole world

in subjection during the time of the emperors.​[12]

The greater number of people and their greater industry are serviceable

in all cases—at home and abroad, in private and in public. But the

greater plenty of money is very limited in its use, and may even

sometimes be a loss to a nation in its commerce with foreigners.

There seems to be a happy concurrence of causes in human affairs which

checks the growth of trade and riches, and hinders them from being

confined entirely to one people, as might naturally at first be dreaded

from the advantages of an established commerce. Where one nation has

got the start of another in trade it is very difficult for the latter

to regain the ground it has lost, because of the superior industry and

skill of the former, and the greater stocks of which its merchants are

possessed, and which enable them to trade for so much smaller profits.

But these advantages are compensated, in some measure, by the low price

of labour in every nation which has not an extensive commerce, and

does not very much abound in gold and silver. Manufactures, therefore,

gradually shift their places, leaving those countries and provinces

which they have already enriched, and flying to others, whither they

are allured by the cheapness of provisions and labour, till they have

enriched these also and are again banished by the same causes. And, in

general, we may observe that the dearness of everything, from plenty

of money, is a disadvantage which attends an established commerce, and

sets bounds to it in every country by enabling the poorer states to

under-sell the richer in all foreign markets.

This has made me entertain a great doubt concerning the benefit of

banks and paper-credit, which are so generally esteemed advantageous

to every nation. That provisions and labour should become dear by the

increase of trade and money is, in many respects, an inconvenience;

but an inconvenience that is unavoidable, and the effect of that

public wealth and prosperity which are the end of all our wishes. It

is compensated by the advantages which we reap from the possession of

these precious metals, and the weight which they give the nation in

all foreign wars and negotiations. But there appears no reason for

increasing that inconvenience by a counterfeit money, which foreigners

will not accept in any payment, and which any great disorder in the

state will reduce to nothing. There are, it is true, many people in

every rich state who, having large sums of money, would prefer paper

with good security, as being of more easy transport and more safe

custody. If the public provide not a bank, private bankers will take

advantage of this circumstance; as the goldsmiths formerly did in

London, or as the bankers do at present in Dublin; and therefore it

is better, it may be thought, that a public company should enjoy the

benefit of the paper-credit which always will have place in every

opulent kingdom. But to endeavour artificially to increase such a

credit can never be the interest of any trading nation; but must lay

them under disadvantages, by increasing money beyond its natural

proportion to labour and commodities, and thereby heightening their

price to the merchant and manufacturer. And in this view, it must be

allowed that no bank could be more advantageous than such a one as

locked up all the money it received,​[13] and never augmented the

circulating coin, as is usual, by returning part of its treasure into

commerce. A public bank by this expedient might cut off much of the

dealings of private bankers and money-jobbers; and though the state

bore the charge of salaries to the directors and tellers of this

bank (for, according to the preceding supposition, it would have no

profit from its dealings), the national advantage, resulting from the

low price of labour and the destruction of paper-credit, would be a

sufficient compensation. Not to mention that so large a sum, lying

ready at command, would be a great convenience in times of public

danger and distress; and what part of it was used might be replaced at

leisure, when peace and tranquillity were restored to the nation.

But of this subject of paper-credit we shall treat more largely

hereafter, and I shall finish this essay on money by proposing and

explaining two observations, which may perhaps serve to employ the

thoughts of our speculative politicians, for to these only I all along

address myself. It is enough that I submit to the ridicule sometimes in

this age attached to the character of a philosopher, without adding to

it that which belongs to a projector.

It was a shrewd observation of Anacharsis the Scythian, who had never

seen money in his own country, that gold and silver seemed to him of

no use to the Greeks but to assist them in numeration and arithmetic.

It is indeed evident that money is nothing but the representation

of labour and commodities, and serves only as a method of rating or

estimating them. Where coin is in greater plenty, as a greater quantity

of it is required to represent the same quantity of goods, it can have

no effect, either good or bad, taking a nation within itself; no more

than it would make any alteration on a merchant’s books if, instead

of the Arabian method of notation, which requires few characters,

he should make use of the Roman, which requires a great many. Nay,

the greater quantity of money, like the Roman characters, is rather

inconvenient, and requires greater trouble both to keep and transport

it. But notwithstanding this conclusion, which must be allowed just, it

is certain that since the discovery of mines in America industry has

increased in all the nations of Europe, except in the possessors of

those mines; and this may justly be ascribed, amongst other reasons,

to the increase of gold and silver. Accordingly, we find that in every

kingdom into which money begins to flow in greater abundance than

formerly everything takes a new face; labour and industry gain life,

the merchant becomes more enterprising, the manufacturer more diligent

and skilful, and even the farmer follows his plough with greater

alacrity and attention. This is not easily to be accounted for, if

we consider only the influence which a greater abundance of coin has

in the kingdom itself, by heightening the price of commodities, and

obliging every one to pay a greater number of these little yellow or

white pieces for everything he purchases. And as to foreign trade,

it appears that great plenty of money is rather disadvantageous, by

raising the price of every kind of labour.

To account, then, for this phenomenon, we must consider that though the

high price of commodities be a necessary consequence of the increase

of gold and silver, yet it follows not immediately upon that increase;

but some time is required before the money circulates through the

whole state, and makes its effects be felt on all ranks of people. At

first, no alteration is perceived; by degrees the price rises, first

of one commodity then of another, till the whole at last reaches

a just proportion with the new quantity of specie which is in the

kingdom. In my opinion, it is only in this interval or intermediate

situation, between the acquisition of money and rise of prices, that

the increasing quantity of gold and silver is favourable to industry.

When any quantity of money is imported into a nation, it is not at

first dispersed into many hands, but is confined to the coffers of a

few persons, who immediately seek to employ it to the best advantage.

Here are a set of manufacturers or merchants, we shall suppose, who

have received returns of gold and silver for goods which they sent to

Cadiz. They are thereby enabled to employ more workmen than formerly,

who never dream of demanding higher wages, but are glad of employment

from such good paymasters. If workmen become scarce, the manufacturer

gives higher wages, but at first requires an increase of labour;

and this is willingly submitted to by the artisan, who can now eat

and drink better, to compensate his additional toil and fatigue. He

carries his money to market, where he finds everything at the same

price as formerly, but returns with greater quantity and of better

kinds, for the use of his family. The farmer and gardener, finding

that all commodities are taken off, apply themselves with alacrity

to the raising more; and at the same time can afford to take better

and more clothes from their tradesmen, whose price is the same as

formerly, and their industry only whetted by so much new gain. It is

easy to trace the money in its progress through the whole commonwealth;

where we shall find that it must first quicken the diligence of every

individual, before it increase the price of labour.

And that the specie may increase to a considerable pitch before it have

this latter effect appears, amongst other instances, from the frequent

operations of the French king on the money; where it was always found

that the augmenting the numerary value did not produce a proportional

rise of the prices, at least for some time. In the last year of Louis

XIV. money was raised three-sevenths, but prices augmented only one.

Corn in France is now sold at the same price, or for the same number

of livres it was in 1683; though silver was then at thirty livres the

mark, and is now at fifty;​[14] not to mention the great addition of

gold and silver which may have come into that kingdom since the former

period.

From the whole of this reasoning we may conclude that it is of no

manner of consequence, with regard to the domestic happiness of a

state, whether money be in a greater or less quantity. The good

policy of the magistrate consists only in keeping it, if possible,

still increasing; because, by that means, he keeps alive a spirit of

industry in the nation, and increases the stock of labour, in which

consists all real power and riches. A nation whose money decreases is

actually, at that time, much weaker and more miserable than another

nation which possesses no more money but is on the increasing hand.

This will be easily accounted for if we consider that the alterations

in the quantity of money, either on the one side or the other, are not

immediately attended with proportionable alterations in the prices of

commodities. There is always an interval before matters be adjusted to

their new situation, and this interval is as pernicious to industry

when gold and silver are diminishing as it is advantageous when these

metals are increasing. The workman has not the same employment from the

manufacturer and merchant, though he pays the same price for everything

in the market; the farmer cannot dispose of his corn and cattle, though

he must pay the same rent to his landlord. The poverty, and beggary,

and sloth which must ensue are easily foreseen.

The second observation which I proposed to make with regard to money

may be explained after the following manner. There are some kingdoms,

and many provinces in Europe (and all of them were once in the same

condition), where money is so scarce that the landlord can get

none at all from his tenants, but is obliged to take his rent in kind,

and either to consume it himself, or transport it to places where

he may find a market. In those countries the prince can levy few or

no taxes but in the same manner; and as he will receive very small

benefit from impositions so paid, it is evident that such a kingdom

has very little force even at home, and cannot maintain fleets and

armies to the same extent as if every part of it abounded in gold and

silver.​[15] There is surely a greater disproportion betwixt the force

of Germany at present and what it was three centuries ago, than there

is in its industry, people, and manufactures. The Austrian dominions

in the empire are in general well peopled and well cultivated, and are

of great extent, but have not a proportionable weight in the balance

of Europe; proceeding, as is commonly supposed, from the scarcity of

money. How do all these facts agree with that principle of reason, that

the quantity of gold and silver is in itself altogether indifferent?

According to that principle, wherever a sovereign has numbers of

subjects, and these have plenty of commodities, he should of course be

great and powerful, and they rich and happy, independent of the greater

or lesser abundance of the precious metals. These admit of divisions

and subdivisions to a great extent; and where they would become so

small as to be in danger of being lost, it is easy to mix them with a

baser metal, as is practised in some countries of Europe, and by that

means raise them to a bulk more sensible and convenient. They still

serve the same purposes of exchange, whatever their number may be, or

whatever colour they may be supposed to have.

To these difficulties, I answer that the effect here supposed to flow

from scarcity of money really arises from the manners and customs of

the inhabitants, and that we mistake, as is too usual, a collateral

effect for a cause. The contradiction is only apparent, but it

requires some thought and reflection to discover the principles by

which we can reconcile reason to experience.

It seems a maxim almost self-evident that the prices of everything

depend on the proportion between commodities and money, and that any

considerable alteration on either of these has the same effect, either

of heightening or lowering the prices. Increase the commodities, they

become cheaper; increase the money, they rise in their value. As, on

the other hand, a diminution of the former and that of the latter have

contrary tendencies.

It is also evident that the prices do not so much depend on the

absolute quantity of commodities and that of money which are in a

nation, as in that of the commodities which come or may come to market,

and of the money which circulates. If the coin be locked up in chests,

it is the same thing with regard to prices as if it were annihilated;

if the commodities be hoarded in granaries, a like effect follows. As

the money and commodities, in these cases, never meet, they cannot

affect each other. Were we, at any time, to form conjectures concerning

the price of provisions, the corn which the farmer must reserve for

the maintenance of himself and family ought never to enter into the

estimation. It is only the overplus, compared to the demand, that

determines the value.

To apply these principles, we must consider that in the first and more

uncultivated ages of any state, ere fancy has confounded her wants

with those of nature, men, contented with the productions of their

own fields, or with those rude preparations which they themselves can

work upon them, have little occasion for exchange, or at least for

money, which, by agreement, is the common measure of exchange. The wool

of the farmer’s own flock, spun in his own family, and wrought by a

neighbouring weaver, who receives his payment in corn or wool, suffices

for furniture or clothing. The carpenter, the smith, the mason, the

tailor are retained by wages of a like nature; and the landlord

himself, dwelling in the neighbourhood, is contented to receive his

rent in the commodities raised by the farmer. The greatest part

of these he consumes at home, in rustic hospitality; the rest, perhaps,

he disposes of for money to the neighbouring town, whence he draws the

few materials of his expense and luxury.

But after men begin to refine on all these enjoyments, and live not

always at home, nor are contented with what can be raised in their

neighbourhood, there is more exchange and commerce of all kinds, and

more money enters into that exchange. The tradesmen will not be paid in

corn, because they want something more than barley to eat. The farmer

goes beyond his own parish for the commodities he purchases, and cannot

always carry his commodities to the merchant who supplies him. The

landlord lives in the capital, or in a foreign country, and demands

his rent in gold and silver, which can easily be transported to him.

Great undertakers, and manufacturers, and merchants arise in every

commodity; and these can conveniently deal in nothing but in specie.

And consequently, in this situation of society, the coin enters into

many more contracts, and by that means is much more employed than in

the former.

The necessary effect is, that, provided the money does not increase in

the nation, everything must become much cheaper in times of industry

and refinement than in rude, uncultivated ages. It is the proportion

between the circulating money and the commodities in the market which

determines the prices. Goods that are consumed at home, or exchanged

with other goods in the neighbourhood, never come to market; they

affect not in the least the current specie; with regard to it they

are as if totally annihilated; and consequently this method of using

them sinks the proportion on the side of the commodities and increases

the prices. But after money enters into all contracts and sales, and

is everywhere the measure of exchange, the same national cash has a

much greater task to perform: all commodities are then in the market;

the sphere of circulation is enlarged; it is the same case as if that

individual sum were to serve a larger kingdom; and therefore, the

proportion being here lessened on the side of the money, everything

must become cheaper, and the prices gradually fall.

By the most exact computations that have been formed all over Europe,

after making allowance for the alteration in the numerary value or

the denomination, it is found that the prices of all things have only

risen three, or at most, four times, since the discovery of the West

Indies. But will any one assert that there is not much more than four

times the coin in Europe that was in the fifteenth century and the

centuries preceding it? The Spaniards and Portuguese from their mines,

the English, French, and Dutch by their African trade, and by their

interlopers in the West Indies, bring home six millions a year, of

which not above a third part goes to the East Indies. This sum alone

in ten years would probably double the ancient stock of money in

Europe. And no other satisfactory reason can be given why all prices

have not risen to a much more exorbitant height, except that derived

from a change of customs and manners. Besides that more commodities

are produced by additional industry, the same commodities come more

to market after men depart from their ancient simplicity of manners;

and though this increase has not been equal to that of money, it has,

however, been considerable, and has preserved the proportion between

coin and commodities nearer the ancient standard.

Were the question proposed, Which of these methods of living in the

people, the simple or refined, is most advantageous to the state or

public? I should, without much scruple, prefer the latter, in a view to

politics at least; and should produce this as an additional reason for

the encouragement of trade and manufactures.

When men live in the ancient simple manner, and supply all their

necessaries from domestic industry or from the neighbourhood, the

sovereign can levy no taxes in money from a considerable part of his

subjects; and if he will impose on them any burdens, he must take his

payment in commodities, with which alone they abound—a method

attended with such great and obvious inconveniences, that they need

not here be insisted on. All the money he can pretend to raise must be

from his principal cities, where alone it circulates; and these, it

is evident, cannot afford him so much as the whole state could, did

gold and silver circulate through the whole. But besides this obvious

diminution of the revenue, there is also another cause of the poverty

of the public in such a situation. Not only the sovereign receives less

money, but the same money goes not so far as in times of industry and

general commerce. Everything is dearer where the gold and silver are

supposed equal, and that because fewer commodities come to market, and

the whole coin bears a higher proportion to what is to be purchased by

it, whence alone the prices of everything are fixed and determined.

Here then we may learn the fallacy of the remark, often to be met with

in historians, and even in common conversation, that any particular

state is weak, though fertile, populous, and well cultivated, merely

because it wants money. It appears that the want of money can never

injure any state within itself: for men and commodities are the

real strength of any community. It is the simple manner of living

which here hurts the public, by confining the gold and silver to few

hands and preventing its universal diffusion and circulation. On the

contrary, industry and refinements of all kinds incorporate it with

the whole state, however small its quantity may be; they digest it

into every vein, so to speak, and make it enter into every transaction

and contract. No hand is entirely empty of it. And as the prices of

everything fall by that means, the sovereign has a double advantage: he

may draw money by his taxes from every part of the state, and what he

receives goes farther in every purchase and payment.

Hume's Political Discourses · 第 4 / 25 段