| | 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 Wuertemberg. 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 _Enquete_
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
L5,000,000 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 L13,285,678,
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
L16,532,215, 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 debris 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 | L329,918 | L1,611,896 | L2,045,254 |
| 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 mediaeval 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 comunemente 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 ne a grossoni, ne a quattrini ma vagliano quello e quanto
sara la sua commune valuta di per di 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
mediaeval 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 Nicolo 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