Part II. is divided into two Branches, viz.:--

(1) Philosophy.

(2) Mathematics.

The nature of the examination may be indicated by the following

requirements in Branch (I):--

Written

(i.) An essay in French on a philosophical subject.

(ii.) An examination in physical and natural science.

Oral

(i.) Interrogation on philosophy and philosophical writers.

(ii.) Interrogation on contemporary history.

(iii.) Interrogation on physical science.

(iv.) Interrogation on natural science.

V. Co-ordination with Teaching.

The syllabus of the examination is that prescribed for the higher

classes in the Government secondary schools.

The candidate may submit his _livret scolaire_, or school record,

which will be taken into account.

VI. Examiners.

The Board of Examiners (or "jury") consists of (i.) University

examiners being members of a faculty of letters or faculty of

sciences; (ii.) secondary teachers, active or retired, selected by

the minister of public instruction. The Board consists of from four

to six examiners, of whom, when the number is even, half are chosen

from either category.

VII. Nature of Examination and General Remarks.

The written portion of Part I. extends over from 9 to 10 hours in

all (not on a single day), in periods of 3 or 4 hours each; the

written portion of Part II. extends over from 6 to 9 hours. The oral

examination for each part lasts 3/4 hour on the average, and is

public.

TABLE III.--SCOTLAND: SCHOOL-LEAVING EXAMINATION

I. Name of Examination.

Scottish school-leaving examination (established 1888). (See

pamphlet on the "Leaving Certificate Examination" issued by the

Scottish Education Department, 1908.)

II. Minimum Age for Entry.

17 on 1st of January following the year in which the candidate

passes the last of the written examinations.

III. Length of Course of Study.

4 years.

IV. Subjects.

Candidates must pass in four subjects on the higher grade standard,

or in three subjects on the higher grade standard and two on the

lower. A pass in drawing is accepted in lieu of one of the two lower

grade passes. A pass in Gaelic is reckoned as a pass on lower grade.

All candidates must have passed in higher English and in either

higher or lower grade mathematics. The remaining subjects may be

either science with one or more languages (Latin Greek, French,

German, Spanish, or Italian), or languages only. But where two or

more languages other than English are taken, the candidate's group

must include either higher or lower grade Latin. A pass in Spanish,

Italian, or science (in which subjects there is only one

examination) is reckoned as a pass on the higher grade standard.

V. Co-ordination with Teaching.

Schools are inspected, and the course of instruction must be

approved by the Scottish Education Department, but the examinations

are conducted by external examiners with whom teachers are not

associated.

VI. Examiners.

The examiners are appointed by the Scottish Education Department.

VII. Nature of Examination and General Remarks.

The examination consists of a written examination and an oral

examination, on which stress is laid. The length of the examination

varies with the subjects selected. The periods of examination vary

from 1 to 2-1/2 hours. If the candidate selects on the higher grade,

English, Latin, mathematics, and French, the examination extends

over 19-1/2 hours.

TABLE IV.--UNIVERSITY OF LONDON SCHOOL EXAMINATION, MATRICULATION STANDARD

I. Name of Examination.

School examination, matriculation standard (established in 1902).

_Note_--A higher school-leaving certificate is awarded to pupils who

(i.) have pursued an approved course of study for a period of years

at a school or schools under inspection approved by the University;

and (ii.) being matriculated students, have passed the "higher

school examination" in at least three subjects at one and the same

examination.

II. Minimum Age For Entry.

The minimum age of entry is 15, but if the candidate is under 16 he

must remain at school until he is 16 years of age in order to be

qualified for the school-leaving certificate, and cannot be

registered as a student of the University until he has reached that

age.

III. Length of Course of Study.

The curriculum of each school is considered on its own merits.

IV. Subjects.

Pupils must satisfy the examiners in not less than five subjects, as

follows:--

(1) English.

(2) Elementary mathematics.

(3) Latin, or elementary mechanics, or elementary physics--heat,

light and sound, or elementary chemistry, or elementary botany, or

general elementary science.

(4) and (5) Two of the following subjects, neither of which has

already been taken under section (3). If Latin be not taken, one of

the other subjects selected must be another language, either ancient

or modern, from the list, and languages other than those included in

the list may be taken if approved by the University, provided that

the language is included in the regular curriculum:--Latin, Greek,

French, German, ancient history, modern history, history and

geography, physical and general geography, logic, geometrical and

mechanical drawing, mathematics (more advanced), elementary

mechanics, elementary chemistry, elementary physics--heat, light and

sound, elementary physics--electricity and magnetism, elementary

biology--botany, elementary biology--zoology, general elementary

science (chemistry and physics).

V. Co-ordination with Teaching.

Schools under approved inspection, and course of instruction

approved by the University.

The papers are ordinarily set on the matriculation syllabus, but

papers may be specially set more closely in accordance with the

school curriculum provided that the syllabus proposed is approved by

the University as at least equivalent to that for which it is

substituted.

VI. Examiners.

The examiners are ordinarily those appointed by the University for

the ordinary matriculation examination.

VII. Nature of Examination and General Remarks.

The examination extends over at least 18 hours, and includes an oral

examination in modern languages.

Practical.

The laboratory examination may be used in subjects like physics,

chemistry, geology, zoology, botany, anatomy, physiology, to test powers

of manipulation and knowledge of experimental methods. In some cases

(e.g. in certain honours examinations) the examination may be prolonged

over one or more days, and may test higher powers of investigation. But

such powers can only be fully tested by the performance of original

work, under conditions difficult to fulfil in the examination room or

laboratory. At the French examinations for the _prix de Rome_ the

candidates are required to execute a painting in a given number of days,

under strict supervision (_en loge_).

In medicine the clinical examination of a patient is a test carried out

under conditions more nearly approaching those of actual work than any

other; and distinction in medical examinations is probably more often

followed by distinction in after life than is the case in other

examinations.

Thesis.

For the doctor's degree (where this is not an honorary distinction) a

thesis or dissertation is generally, though not invariably, required in

England. Of recent years the thesis has been introduced into lower

examinations; it is required for the master's degree at London in the

case of internal students, in subjects other than mathematics (1910);

both at Oxford and London, the B.Sc. degree, and at Cambridge the B.A.

degree, may be given for research, although the number of students

proceeding to a degree in this way is at present relatively small. In

certain of the honours B.A. and B.Sc. examinations at Manchester and

Liverpool, candidates may take the written portion of the examination at

the end of the second year's course of study and submit a dissertation

at the end of the third year. Theses are generally examined by two or

more specialists.

5. _Competitive Examinations._--The arrangement of students in order of

merit led naturally to the use of examinations not only as a qualifying

but also as a selective test, and to the offering of money prizes

(including exhibitions, scholarships and fellowships) on the results. In

1854 selection by examination as a method of appointment to posts in the

English public service was first substituted for the patronage system,

which had caused grave dissatisfaction (see Macaulay's speech on the

subject, _The Times_ of the 25th of June 1853). The first public

competitive examination for the Royal Military Academy, Woolwich, took

place in 1855, and in 1870 the principle of open competition for the

civil service was adopted as a general rule. (For further details see

CIVIL SERVICE.)

In the Wurttemberg civil service candidates are admitted to a year's

probation after passing a theoretical examination, at the conclusion of

which they must pass an examination of a more practical character (A.

Herbert, _Sacrifice of Education_ ..., 1889, p. 111).

In the award of scholarships, &c., it should be definitely decided

whether the scholarship is to be awarded (1) for attainment, in which

case the examination-test pure and simple may suffice, or (2) for

promise, in which case personal information and a _curriculum vitae_ are

necessary. To take a simple instance: a candidate partly educated in

Germany may obtain more marks in German at a scholarship examination

than another who is more gifted, but whose opportunities have been less;

the question at once arises, are the examiners to take the circumstances

of the candidate into account or not? It is understood that at the

colleges of the older universities such circumstances are considered. It

must again be decided whether the financial circumstances of candidates

are to be taken into account; are scholarships intended as prizes, or as

a means of enabling poor students to obtain a university education? In

some cases wealthy students have been known to return the emoluments of

scholarships. In many universities of the United States there is a

definite understanding that emoluments shall only be accepted by those

needing them. It would not be difficult to ask candidates to make a

confidential declaration on this subject on entrance and to establish in

Great Britain a tradition similar to that of the United States, and

steps in this direction have been taken both at Oxford and Cambridge

(Lord Curzon of Kedleston, _University Reform_, p. 86).

A special allowance may be made for age. In certain scholarship

examinations held formerly by the London County Council a percentage was

added to the marks of each candidate proportionate to the number of

months by which his age fell short of the maximum age for entry. The

whole subject of entrance scholarships at English schools and

universities, and especially their tendency to produce premature

specialization, has recently been much discussed.

6. _The Organization and Conduct of Examinations._--The organization and

conduct of examinations, in such a way that each candidate shall be

treated in precisely the same way as every other candidate, is a complex

matter, especially where several thousand candidates are concerned. The

greatest precautions must be taken to ensure the secrecy of the

examination papers before the examination, and the effective isolation

of individual candidates during the examination. The supervision should

be adequate to remove all temptation to copying. The hygienic conditions

should be such as to reduce the strain to a minimum. The question of the

mental fatigue produced by examinations has been studied by certain

German observers, but has not yet been fully investigated.

7. _Marking, Classification and Errors of Detail._--In applying a single

test in a qualifying examination it would be sufficient to mark

candidates as passing or failing. But examinations consist as a rule of

a number of tests, each one of which is complex; and a mark is recorded

in respect of each test or portion of a test in order to enable the

examining body to estimate the performance, considered as a whole, of

the candidate. At Oxford the marks are not numerical, but the papers are

judged as of this or that supposed "class," and various degrees of merit

are indicated by the symbols [alpha], [beta], [gamma], [delta], to which

the signs + or -may be prefixed, according as they are above or below a

certain standard within each class. At Cambridge, numerical marks are

used. The advantage of numerical marks is that they are more easily

manipulated than symbols; the disadvantage, that they produce the false

impression that merit can be estimated with mathematical accuracy.

Professor F.Y. Edgeworth, in two papers on "The Statistics of

Examinations" and the "Element of Chance in Competitive Examinations"

(_Journal of the Royal Statistical Society_, 1888 and 1890), has dealt

with the subject, although on somewhat limited lines. His

investigations show clearly that with candidates near the border-line of

failure, which must necessarily be fixed at a given point (subject to

certain allowances, where more than one subject is considered), the

element of chance necessarily enters largely into the question of pass

and failure. The fact may be stated in this way:--the general efficiency

of the test being granted, it is true to say that the large majority of

those who pass an examination will be superior in efficiency to those

who fail; but a few of those who fail may be superior to a few of those

who pass. These errors are not peculiar to the examination system, they

are inherent in all human judgments. It is necessary to allow for them

in considering the failure of an individual candidate as an index of

inefficiency.

The element of chance, which prevails in the region on either side of

the border between pass and failure, obviously prevails equally on

either side of the border between "classes," where candidates are

classified; it has been suggested by Dr Schuster that numerical order

should accompany classification so as to avoid the creation of an

artificial gap between the last candidate in one class and the highest

in the next. Edgeworth's objection to such an argument is that the

number of uncertainties is far less when candidates are classed than

when they are placed in ostensible order of merit.

The difficulties of comparison of marks are further complicated when

students take different subjects and it is necessary to compare their

merit by means of marks allotted by different examiners and added

together. In a pass examination the question has to be considered how

far, if at all, excellence in one subject shall compensate for

deficiency in another, a question which is indeterminate until the

precise object of the whole examination is formulated. In the

competitive examination for the Indian civil service, places are

allotted on the aggregate of marks obtained in a number of subjects

selected by the candidate from a list of thirty-two. The successful

candidates are compared a year later on the results of another

examination in which there is again a choice, though a much more limited

one. The order of merit in the two examinations is, as a rule, very

different.

Two further points may be noted. An examiner may have underestimated the

time required to answer the questions which he has set; this will be

obvious if with a large number of candidates (say 300 or 400) none

approaches the maximum mark. In this case the maximum should be reduced.

Again, it is generally recognized to be undesirable to give marks for a

smattering. In order to avoid this various devices are adopted. The

simplest is to award a proportion of marks (say 10 to 15, or even 20%)

for "general impression." In some examinations, unless say 20% or more

marks are obtained for a particular subject, no credit is given for the

paper in that subject. Latham (_The Action of Examinations_, 1877, p.

490) describes other numerical adjustments used to meet this difficulty,

especially that used in English civil service examinations. The

numerical results of the civil service examinations are reduced so as to

conform to a certain symmetrical "frequency-curve," of which the

abscissae represent percentages of marks between definite limits and the

ordinates the number of candidates obtaining marks between those limits.

C.E. Fawsitt (_The Education of the Examiner_, Royal Philosophical

Society of Glasgow, 1905) shows that frequency-curves deduced from

actual investigation of class-marks are not symmetrical, but have two

maxima corresponding to the performance of "non-workers" and of

"workers." In pass examinations of a well-known character there is a

maximum just beyond the pass mark, this being the point of efficiency at

which many students aim.

8. _The Object and Efficiency of Examinations, and their Indirect

Effects._--In order to estimate the efficiency of an examination as a

test, the precise question should be asked in each case--what is it

intended to test? Much of the evil attributed to, and resulting from,

examinations is due to the fact that this question has not been

definitely put, and that a test legitimate for certain purposes has been

used for others to which it is unsuited. Examinations are suited in the

first instance for the purpose for which they were originally designed

in medieval universities--the test of technical and professional

capacity; it has never been proposed to abolish qualifying examinations

for doctors, pharmaceutical chemists, &c.; the tests applied are (or

should be) direct tests of capacity carried out under conditions as

nearly as possible like those of actual practice. If a student can

auscultate correctly, or make up a prescription, at an examination, he

will in all probability be able to do so in other circumstances.

Examinations as tests of the knowledge of isolated facts are necessarily

of relatively small value, because the memory of such facts is

transient; and memorization of a large number of facts for examination

purposes is generally admitted to be specially transient; the

"knowledge-test," considered apart from a test of capacity, is in fact

not a test of permanent knowledge, but of the power of retaining facts

for a length of time which it is impossible to estimate and which with

some candidates extends over a few weeks only. When used as tests of

"general culture," examinations, in the view of Paulsen, based on a

study of German education, not only fail in their purpose, but tend to

destroy the faculties which it is desired to develop (_Geschichte des

gelehrten Unterrichts_, ii. 684 et seq.); to prepare ready answers to

the numberless questions which an examiner may ask on a large variety of

subjects is to paralyse the natural and free activity of the mind (cf.

A.C. Benson on the results of English secondary classical education,

_From a College Window_, 3rd ed., 1906, pp. 154-177). If pushed to its

logical conclusion the view of Paulsen must, it is submitted, lead to

the complete abandonment at examinations of tests of "knowledge" as

distinguished from direct tests of capacity. Thus isolated questions on

details of grammar would disappear from papers on the mother-tongue and

on foreign languages, in which the test would consist mainly or entirely

of composition and translation. Erudition would be tested by the power

of writing, at leisure, a dissertation on some subject selected by the

examiners or the candidate or, in the case of a teacher, by the delivery

of a lecture on the subject. At the French _agregation_ candidates are

given twenty-four hours for the preparation of a lecture of this kind.

Such examinations would test the "skill in the manipulation of facts

which is the true sign of a trained intelligence" (cf. K. Pearson, "The

Function of Science in the Modern State," _Ency. Brit._ 10th ed. xxxii.

Prefatory essay). They might possibly be supplemented by easy oral

examinations to test both range of knowledge and readiness of mind. But

in the case of a pupil who had passed through a good secondary school it

would be as safe to rely for supplementary information under this head

on the testimony of his teachers, as it is to rely on their evidence

with regard to the fundamental and all-important element on which no

examination supplies direct information--personal character.

The main arguments of those opposed to the examination system may be

summarized as follows: (i.) Examinations tend to destroy natural

interests and exclude from the attention of the pupil all matters

outside the purview of the examination (they would not do so if

examinations were so limited in character that preparation therefor

could absorb only a fraction of the pupil's time); (ii.) they tend to

cultivate a personal judgment where no personal basis of judgment is

possible (this argument, directed mainly against the Oxford essay

system, applies not to examinations in general, but to the character of

the subjects set for essays); (iii.) competitive examinations on the

home and Indian civil services scheme tend to diffuse mental energy over

too many subjects (but see (xviii.) below); (iv.) examinations,

especially competitive examinations, tend to become more and more

difficult, difficulty being confused with efficiency--this has shown

itself with the Cambridge mathematical tripos, in which for years

questions of increasing difficulty were set on relatively unimportant

subjects, until the examination was reformed (reply: all examinations

should be overhauled periodically); (v.) they tend to paralyse the

powers of exposition, all statements of knowledge being thrown into a

form suitable, not for an uninstructed person, but for one who already

possesses it, the examiner (this tendency should be counteracted by

definite training in composition); (vi.) the sample of knowledge and

capacity yielded at an examination is frequently not a fair sample; it

is liable to extreme variations in a favourable sense, if the candidate

happens to have prepared the precise questions asked; in an unfavourable

sense, if the candidate is suffering from misfortune or from accidental

ill-health, the latter, owing to the periodic function, occurring much

more frequently in the case of women than of men--[the reform of

examination methods may remove to a great extent the element of chance

in questions set; in a competitive examination it is impossible to allow

for ill-health; in a qualifying examination it is difficult to make any

allowance unless the examination is definitely conducted in whole or in

part by the teachers, and the past record of the candidate is taken into

account (cf. Paulsen, _The German Universities_, pp. 344-345)]; (vii.)

examinations of several hundred candidates at a time cannot be

rationally conducted so as to be equally fair to the individuality of

all candidates; the individual test is the only complete one (it is

admitted that examinations on a large scale necessarily involve a margin

of error; but this error may be reduced to a minimum, especially by a

combination of oral and practical with written work); (viii.) the

multiplicity of school examinations required for different reasons

produces confusion in our secondary education (there is a growing

tendency to admit equivalence of "school-leaving" and entrance

examinations; thus entrance examinations of Oxford, Cambridge and

London, and the Northern Universities Joint Board are interchangeable

under certain conditions); (ix.) the multiplicity of examinations tends

to "underselling" (the success of the London examinations in medicine

proves that a high standard attracts candidates as well as a low one;

possibly intermediate standards may be killed in the competition; it is

by no means obvious that a uniform system of examinations would conduce

to efficiency); (x.) examinations produce physical damage to health,

especially in the case of women-students (on this point more statistical

evidence is needed; see, however, Engelmann quoted by G. Stanley Hall,

_Adolescence_, 1905, ii. 588 et seq.); (xi.) examinations have in

England mechanically cast the education of women into the same mould as

that of men, without reference to the different social functions of the

two sexes (the remedy is obvious); (xii.) it is unjustifiable to give a

man a university position on the results of his performance in the

examination room, a practice common in England though almost unknown on

the continent; a just estimate of a man's powers in research or for

teaching can only be properly based on his performance. The present

system merely leads to the transmission of the sterile art of passing

examinations. (At Oxford and Cambridge many fellowships are now awarded

on the results of examination; it is sometimes stated, in defence of

this system, that young men cannot be expected to carry out research in

classics or philosophy.)

On the other hand, the defenders of examinations reply that (xiii.)

examinations are necessary in order to test the efficiency of schools to

which grants of public money are given (this argument has become

somewhat out of date owing to the recent substitution of "inspection"

for examination as a test of the efficiency of schools; a combination of

inspection and examination is also sometimes used); (xiv.) they serve as

a necessary incentive to steady and concentrated work[4] (the reply made

to this is that the incentive is a bad one, and that with efficient

teachers it is unnecessary); (xv.) they show both student and teacher

where they have failed (unnecessary for efficient teachers); (xvi.)

though possibly harmful to the highest class of men, they are good for

the mass (reply: no system which damages the highest class of men is

tolerable); (xvii.) they are indispensable as an impartial means of

selecting men for the civil service; (xviii.) in a difficult examination

like the first class civil service examination the qualities of

quickness of comprehension, industry, concentration, power of rapidly

passing from one subject to another, good health, are necessary for

success, though not tested directly, and these qualities are valuable in

any kind of work (this appears to be incontrovertible); (xix.)

examination records show that success in examinations is generally

followed by success in after-life, and the test is therefore efficient

(it does not follow that certain rejected candidates may not be

extremely efficient); (xx.) as a plea for purely "external

examinations," teachers cannot be trusted to be impartial and it is

better for a boy to "cram" than to curry favour with his teacher

(Latham).

The brief comments in brackets, appended above to the arguments, merely

indicate what has been said or can be said on the other side. It can

scarcely be doubted that in spite of the powerful objections that have

been advanced against examinations, they are, in the view of the

majority of English people, an indispensable element in the social

organization of a highly specialized democratic state, which prefers to

trust nearly all decisions to committees rather than to individuals. But

in view of the extreme importance of the matter, and especially of the

evidence that, for some cause or other (which may or may not be the

examination system), intellectual interest and initiative seem to

diminish in many cases very markedly during school and college life in

England, the whole subject seems to call for a searching and impartial

inquiry.

SOURCES OF INFORMATION.--The works mentioned above, and T.D. Acland,

_Some Account of the Origin and Objects of the New Oxford Examinations

for the Title of Associate in Arts_ (London, 1858); Matthew Arnold,

_Higher Schools and Universities in Germany_ (1874); Graham Balfour,

_The Educational Systems of Great Britain and Ireland_ (2nd ed.,

Oxford, 1903); W.W. Rouse Ball, _Origin and History of the

Mathematical Tripos_ (Cambridge, 1880); Adolf Beier, _Die hoheren

Schulen in Preussen und ihre Lehrer_ (1902-1906) (in progress);

Cloudesley Brereton, "A New Method of awarding Scholarships," _School

World_, 1907, p. 409; G.C. Brodrick, _A History of the University of

Oxford_ (London, 1886); F. Buisson, _Dictionnaire de pedagogie_

(1880-1887); Lord Curzon of Kedleston, _Principles and Methods of

University Reform_ (1909); J. Demogeot and H. Montucci, _De

l'enseignement superieur en Angleterre et en Ecosse_ (1870); H.

Denifle, _Die Universitaten des Mittelalters bis 1400_ (Berlin, 1885);

F.Y. Edgeworth, "The Statistics of Examinations," and "The Element of

Chance in Competitive Examinations," _Journal of the Statistical

Society_, 1888 and 1890 respectively; H.W. Eve, Lecture "On Marking,"

in _The Practice of Education_ (Cambridge, 1883); Charles E. Fawsitt,

_The Education of the Examiner_ (Royal Philosophical Society of

Glasgow) (Glasgow, 1905); J.G. Fitch, "The Proposed Admission of Girls

to the University Local Examination," _Education Miscellanies_ (1865),

vol. x.; W. Garnett, "The Representation of certain Examination

Results," _Journ. Statist. Soc._ (Jan. 1910); G. Stanley Hall,

_Adolescence_ (London, 1905); Sir W. Hamilton, _Discussions on

Philosophy_ (London, 1853); P.J. Hartog, "Universities, Schools and

Examinations" in the _University Review_ (July 1905); P.J. Hartog and

Mrs A.H. Langdon, _The Writing of English_ (1907); Auberon Herbert

(edited by), _The Sacrifice of Education to Examination_, Letters from

"All Sorts and Conditions of Men" (1889); _Influence of Examinations_,

Report by a Committee, British Association Reports for 1903, p. 434.

and for 1904, p. 360; John Jebb, _Remarks upon the Present Mode of

Education in the University of Cambridge_ (4th ed., 1774); Henry

Latham, _On the Action of Examinations_ (Cambridge, 1877); H.C.

Maxwell Lyte, _A History of the University of Oxford to the Year 1530_

(London, 1886); W.A.P. Martin, _The Lore of Cathay_ (Edinburgh and

London, 1901); J.B. Mullinger, _The University of Cambridge_

(Cambridge, 1873); _How to pass Examinations successfully_, by an

Oxford Coach; Mark Pattison, _Suggestions on Academical Organization_

(Edinburgh, 1868); Friedrich Paulsen, _The German Universities and

University Study_ (London, 1906) and _Geschichte des gelehrten

Unterrichts_ (Leipzig, 1896); George Peacock, _Observations on the

Statutes of the University of Cambridge_ (1841); _Programme des

examens du nouveau baccalaureat de l'enseignement secondaire_,

Delalain freres, Paris; Hastings Rashdall, _The Universities of Europe

in the Middle Ages_ (Oxford, 1895); Rein's _Encyklopadisches Handbuch

der Padagogik_ (2nd ed., 1902, &c.), articles "Prufungen" (by F.

Paulsen), &c.; Third Report of the Royal Commissioners on Scientific

Instructions, 1873; J.E. Thorold Rogers, _Education in Oxford_ (1861);

M.E. Sadler, "Memorandum on the Leaving Examinations ... in the

Secondary Schools of Prussia," in Report of Royal Commission on

Secondary Education, vol. v. p. 27 (1895); C.A. Schmid, _Geschichte

der Erziehung_ (Stuttgart, 1884, &c.), and _Encyklopadie des gesammten

Erziehungs- und Unterrichtswesens_ (2nd ed., 1876-87), articles

"Prufung," "Schulprufungen," "Versetzungsprufungen," &c.;

Scholarships, various papers on, by H.B. Baker, A.A. David, H.A.

Miers, M.E. Sadler and H. Bompas Smith, and others, British

Association Report, 1907, pp. 707-718; Arthur Schuster, article on

"Universities and Examinations" in the University Review (May 1905);

W.H. Sharp, _The Educational System of Japan_ (Office of the

Director-General of Education in India) (Bombay, 1906); Special

Educational Reports, issued by the Board of Education, _passim_;

A.M.M. Stedman, _Oxford: its Life and Schools_ (London, 1887); I.

Todhunter, _Conflict of Studies_ (1873); William Whewell, _Of a

Liberal Education_ (London, 1845); Christopher Wordsworth, _Scholae

academicae_ (Cambridge, 1877); Etienne Zi (or Siu or Seu), _Pratique

des examens litteraires en Chine_ (Shanghai, 1894). Private

information from Professor M.E. Sadler and Mr A.E. Twentyman.

(P. J. H.; A. Wn.)

FOOTNOTES:

[1] W.W. Rouse Ball in his _History of the Study of Mathematics at

Cambridge_ (1889), p. 193, states that he can find no record of any

European examinations by means of written papers earlier than those

introduced by R. Bentley at Trinity College, Cambridge, in 1702.

[2] It should be mentioned that the professors of chemistry of a

number of German, Austrian and Swiss universities, have, by

agreement, instituted an intermediate examination in that subject

which students are required to pass before beginning work on the

doctoral thesis. The examination of the students is conducted by the

teachers concerned.

[3] See E.E. Brown in _Monographs on Education in the United States_

(ed. by N.M. Butler, 1900, i. 164), and T. Gregory Foster and H.R.

Reichel, _Report of Mosely Educational Commission_ (1904), pp.

117-119 and 288-289.

[4] The Oxford commissioners of 1852 reported that "the examinations

have become the chief instruments not only for testing the

proficiency of the students but also for stimulating and directing

the studies of the place" (_Report_, p. 61).

EXARCH ([Greek: exarchos], a chief person or leader), a title that has

been conferred at different periods on certain chief officers or

governors, both in secular and ecclesiastical matters. Of these, the

most important were the exarchs of Ravenna (q.v.). In the ecclesiastical

organization the exarch of a _diocese_ (the word being here used of the

political division) was in the 4th and 5th centuries the same as

primate. This dignity was intermediate between the patriarchal and the

metropolitan, the name patriarch being restricted after A.D. 451 to the

chief bishops of the most important cities (see PATRIARCH). The title of

Exarch was also formerly given in the Eastern Church to a general or

superior over several monasteries, and to certain ecclesiastics deputed

by the patriarch of Constantinople to collect the tribute payable by the

Church to the Turkish government. In the modern Greek Church an exarch

is a deputy, or legate _a latere_, of the patriarch, whose office it is

to visit the clergy and churches in the provinces allotted to him. The

title of exarch has been borne by the head of the Bulgarian Church (see

BULGARIA), since in 1872 it repudiated the jurisdiction of the Greek

patriarch of Constantinople. Hence the names of the politico-religious

parties in the recent history of the Near East: "Exarchists" and

"Patriarchists."

EXCAMBION (a word connected with a large class of Low Latin and Romance

forms, such as _cambium_, _concambium_, _scambium_, from Lat. _cambire_,

Gr. [Greek: kambein] or [Greek: kamptein], to bend, turn or fold), in

Scots law, the exchange (q.v.) of one heritable subject for another. The

modern Scottish excambion may consist in the exchange of any heritable

subjects whatever, e.g. a patronage or, what often occurs, a portion of

a glebe for servitude. Writing is not, by the law of Scotland, essential

to an excambion. Chiefly in favour of the class of cottars and small

feuars, and for convenience in straightening marches, the law will

consider the most informal memoranda, and even a verbal agreement, if

supported by the subsequent possession. The power to excamb was

gradually conferred on entailed proprietors. The Montgomery Act, which

was passed in 1770, to facilitate agricultural improvements, permitted

50 acres arable and 100 acres not fit for the plough to be excambed.

This was enlarged by the Rosebery Act in 1836, under which one-fourth of

an entailed estate, not including the mansion-house, home farm and

policies, might be excambed, provided the heirs took no higher grassum

(O.E. _gersum_, fine) than L200. The power was applied to the whole

estate by the Rutherford Act of 1848, and the necessary consents of

substitute heirs are now regulated by the Entail (Scotland) Act 1882.

EXCELLENCY (Lat. _excellentia_, excellence), a title or predicate of

honour. The earliest records of its use are associated with the Frank

and Lombard kings; e.g. Anastasius Bibliothecarius (d. c. 886) in his

life of Pope Honorius refers to Charlemagne as "his excellency" (_ejus

excellentia_); and during the middle ages it was freely applied to or

assumed by emperors, kings and sovereign princes generally, though

rather as a rhetorical flourish than as a part of their formal style.

Its use is well illustrated in the various charters in the Red Book of

the exchequer, where the addresses to the king vary between "your

excellency," "your dignity" (_vestra dignitas_), "your sublimity"

(_vestra sublimitas_) and the like, according to the taste and

inventiveness of the writers. Du Cange also gives examples of the style

_excellentia_ being applied to the pope and even to a bishop (in a

charter of 1182). With the gradual stereotyping of titles of honour that

of "excellency" was definitively superseded in the case of sovereigns of

the highest rank, about the beginning of the 15th century, by those of

"highness" and "grace," and later by "majesty," first assumed in England

by King Henry VIII. Dukes and counts of the Empire and the Italian

reigning princes continued, however, to be "excellencies" for a while

longer. In 1593 the bestowal of the title of _excellence_ by Henry IV.

of France on the duc de Nevers, his ambassador at Rome, set a precedent

that was universally followed from the time of the treaty of Westphalia

(1648). This, together with the reservation in 1640 of the title

"eminence" (q.v.) to the cardinals, led the Italian princes to adopt the

style of "highness" (_altezza_) instead of "excellency." In France, from

1654 onwards, the title of _excellence_ was given to all high civil and

military officials, and this example was followed in Germany in the 18th

century.

The subsequent fate of the title varies very greatly in different

countries. In Great Britain it is borne by the viceroy of India, the

lord-lieutenant of Ireland, all governors of colonies and ambassadors. In

the United States it is part of the official style of the governors of

states, but not of that of the president; though diplomatic usage varies

in this respect, some states (e.g. France) conceding to him the style of

"excellency," others (e.g. Belgium) refusing it. The custom of other

republics differs: in France the president is addressed as _excellence_

by courtesy; in Switzerland the title is omitted; in the South American

republics it is part of the official style (Pradier-Fodere, _Cours de

droit diplom._ i. 89). In Spain the title of _excelencia_ properly

belonged to the grandees and to those who had the right to be covered in

the royal presence, but it was extended also to high officials, viceroys,

ministers, captains-general, lieutenants-general, ambassadors and knights

of the Golden Fleece. In Austria the title _Exzellenz_ belongs properly

to privy councillors. It has, however, gradually been extended by custom

to all the higher military commands from lieutenant-field-marshal

upwards. Ministers, even when not privy councillors, are styled

_Exzellenz_. In Germany the title is borne by the imperial chancellor,

the principal secretaries of state, ministers and _Oberprasidenten_ in

Prussia, by generals from the rank of lieutenant-general upwards, by the

chief court officials, and it is also sometimes bestowed as a title of

honour in cases where it is not attached to the office held by its

recipient. In Russia the title is very common, being borne by all

officers from major-general upwards and by all officials above the rank

of acting privy councillor. Officers and officials of the highest rank

have the title of "high excellency." Finally, in Italy, the title

_eccelenza_, which had come to be used in the republics of Venice and

Genoa as the usual form of address to nobles, has become as meaningless

as the English title of "esquire" or the address of "sir," being,

especially in the south, the usual form of address to any stranger.

In the diplomatic service the title of excellency is technically

reserved to ambassadors, but in addressing envoys also this form is

commonly used by courtesy. (W. A. P.)

EXCHANGE, in general, the action of mutual giving and receiving objects,

interests, benefits, rights, &c. The word comes through the French from

the Late Lat. _excambium_ (see EXCAMBION). The present article deals

with the theory and practice of exchange in monetary transactions, but

this may conveniently be prefaced by a brief statement as to the law

relating to the exchange of property and other matters. In English law

exchange is defined as the mutual grant of equal interests, the one in

consideration of the other. The ancient common law conveyance had

certain restrictions, e.g. identity in quantity of interest, fee-simple

for fee-simple, &c., entry to perfect the conveyance, and an implied

warranty of title and right of entry by either party in case of

eviction. Such exchanges are now effected by mutual conveyances with the

usual covenants for title. Exchanges are also frequently made by order

of the Board of Agriculture under the Inclosure Acts, and there are also

statutes enabling ecclesiastical corporations to exchange benefices with

the approval of the ecclesiastical commissioners. The international

exchange of territories is effected by treaties. The exchange of

prisoners of war is regulated by documents called "cartels" (Med. Lat.

_cartellus_, diminutive of _carta_, paper, bill), which specify a

certain agreed-on value for each rank of prisoners. The practice

superseded the older one of ransom at the end of a war. By the

Regimental Exchanges Act 1875 the sovereign may by regulation authorize

exchanges by officers from one regiment to another. (For "labour

exchanges" see UNEMPLOYMENT.)

Exchange in relation to money affairs denotes a species of barter not of

goods but of the value of goods, a payment in one place being exchanged

for a payment in another place. The popular statement of the theory of

exchange represents four principals involved in two transactions. A and

B are two persons residing in one place different from the domicile of C

and D; A sells goods to C; B buys goods from D; A sells his claim on C

to B, who remits it to D in satisfaction of his debt, and D receives the

cash from C, so that, assuming the two transactions to be of equal

value, one piece of paper satisfies the four parties to these two

transactions, and the trouble, expense and risk of sending money from

both places are avoided. The piece of paper which performs the service

may be a telegraphic order, cheque or bill of exchange. In this

elementary proposition there would be no difficulty of exchange, as the

full value of A's claim on C would be paid for by B, who is under the

necessity of sending in exactly similar amount of money to D; but it can

be seen that in actual practice the claims of one place on another place

would not be exactly balanced by the necessities of the one place to

meet obligations in the other place; thus arises the complication of

exchange, which may best be described as the price of monetary claims on

distant debtors.

Supposing, for example, that A in London had a claim on C in Edinburgh

amounting to L100, and that B in London did not require to remit more

than L90 to D in Edinburgh, it is evident that B in London must be

offered some inducement to take over the whole of A's claim. B might

give A L99:19:0, and could then, after satisfying his debt to D, have

L10 to his credit in Edinburgh, which he could retain there at interest

until he had incurred further liability to D, or he could have the

balance of L10 returned him in coin at an expense, say, of sixpence;

this would leave B with a profit of sixpence on the transaction, and,

assuming that these figures are reasonable, exchange on Edinburgh in

London would be one shilling discount per L100. Supposing the

necessities of B induced him to offer A only L99:14:0 for his L100

claim, A would then prefer that C remitted him L100 in coin, which, on

the above scale of expenses would cost 5s. and A would receive L99:15:0

net. On these premises, exchange on Edinburgh in London cannot fall

below 1/4% discount, and the same circumstances prevent it from rising

above 1/4% premium, for B, in no case, would pay more for A's claim than

L100 plus the cost of sending coin to Scotland. If this basis is

appreciated, all exchange problems between different countries can be

mastered, and the quotations in the daily papers of cable payments,

sight drafts (cheques) and long bills are then understood and supply an

interesting indication of the state of international financial

relations. As shown above, the balance of indebtedness must eventually

be remitted by coin, and consequently when exchange in any city is

quoted at one or other of the limit points given in our example as 1/4%

discount or 1/4% premium, this exchange immediately acquires a very

serious importance, because with the development of modern monetary

systems under which enormous trade is carried on with a most moderate

foundation of actual coin the weakening or strengthening of that

foundation is a very vital matter.

While the understanding of the theory is essential for any facile

interpretation of an exchange, there are of course innumerable details

of practice which require to be known to identify the limit points of

exchange in any particular city. The limit points can only be taken

advantage of by banking experts, and, although we assume a trader

remitting his indebtedness in coin when he is asked to pay too high a

price for his bill of exchange, in actual affairs the banker will supply

the cheque or bill and himself will do the professional business of

sending away bullion. Similarly, we have represented one trader drawing

on another trader and selling his draft to a third trader who remits the

draft to a fourth. In actual practice, however, No. 1 draws on No. 2 and

disposes of his draft to a banker; No. 4 draws on No. 3 and sells his

draft to a banker; because, speaking generally, whenever goods are

shipped, the shipper immediately requires his money; he draws a bill

against the goods, and it is the function of a banker to help, as a sort

of debt-collecting agency, by buying these drafts; and the bank, being a

mart for all forms of remittance, gets an immense variety of demand for

cable payments, cheques and bills on all centres. This does not affect

the theory, for it must be remembered that the banker is a necessary

link between the buyer and seller of exchange, because the seller can

only sell what he has and the buyer must have exactly what he wants.

To return to the question of limit points: if a universal currency

system existed, with the same monetary standard that is used in England,

and the coinage kept in a proper condition of weight and fineness, and

the coin readily supplied to meet every reasonable claim--if, in fact,

the pound sterling were the prevalent coin and the English banking

system obtained everywhere, then we should find all exchange quotations

as simple as our case of London and Edinburgh, that is to say, all

exchanges would be quoted at par or a premium or a discount. The limit

points in any place of the exchange on London would represent simply and

obviously the cost of the transmission of the coin. These limit points

would vary at each place according to the distance from London, the cost

of freight, the risk involved in the transmission and the local rate of

interest. On the continent of Europe some advance has been made in the

direction of a universal coinage. Countries subscribing to the Latin

Union have agreed on the franc as a common unit, and Belgium,

Switzerland, France and Italy quote exchange between themselves at a

premium or discount. Greece, Spain and other countries are also parties

to the arrangement, but their currencies are in a bad state, and the

exchange quotations involve a considerable element of speculation. We

have, however, to deal with another factor in international finance,

namely, the enormous variety of currency systems; and we have then to

discover, in each case, the exchange which represents par and

corresponds to our L100 for L100 in the London-Edinburgh example. The

United States furnishes perhaps the easiest problem, and we must find

out how many dollars in gold contain exactly the same amount of the

precious metal as is contained in one hundred sovereigns. The answer is

486-5/8, and the arithmetic is a question of the mint laws of the two

countries. Gold coin in the United States contains one-tenth alloy and

in England one-twelfth alloy. Ten dollars contain 258 grains of gold,

nine-tenths fine. One pound contains 123.274 grains of gold,

eleven-twelfths fine, consequently L100 is worth $486-5/8, or, to be

exact, $486-2/3, and when cable payments between London and New York are

quoted at 4.86-5/8 for the L1 sterling, exchange is about par. As a

cable payment is an immediate transfer from one city to another, no

question of interest or other charge is involved. Owing to the cost of

sending gold as detailed above, the New York cable exchange varies from

about 4.84 to 4.89-1/2; at the former point gold leaves London for New

York, and at the latter point gold comes to England. Besides insurance,

freight, packing, commission and interest, there must also be considered

the circumstance that coin taken in bulk is always a little worn and

under full weight, and in the process of turning sovereigns into

dollars, the result would not bear out the calculation based on the mint

regulations: consequently, when taking gold from London, the demand

would first fall on the raw metal as received from South Africa or

Australia to be minted in the United States, then on any stock of

American coin the Bank of England might have and be willing to sell by

weight (which would be accounted by tale in New York), and lastly the

demand would be satisfied by sovereigns taken by tale from the Bank of

England and converted by weight in America.

The instance of the American quotation may be further taken to explain

some of the numerous points which the study of the exchange involves. In

the first place, it will be noted that we have quoted the price in

dollars. In London, business in bills, &c., on New York is quoted either

in pence or in dollars, that is to say, payments are negotiated for so

many dollars either at 49-3/16 pence per dollar, or at the equivalent

rate $4.88 for the pound. In practice it is much more convenient to

quote in London in the money of the foreign country, as it makes

comparison with the foreign rate on London very simple. Some foreign

countries quote exchange on London in pence, and then, of course, in

relation to those countries the same practice will obtain in England,

but the majority of the exchange quotations on London are in francs,

marks, gulden, lire, kronen or other foreign money. Another point which

must be explained is the reason why exchange varies between what we have

called the limit points; why there is sometimes so much demand for bills

on London and why at other times so many bills are being offered.

Similar causes operate on other exchanges, and if we develop the New

York case we shall provide explanations for exchange movements in other

countries.

At one time the financial relations between England and America were as

follows. England was the principal creditor of the United States, and

the latter country had to remit continually very large amounts in

payment of interest on English money and profits on English investments,

in payment for shipping freights, for banking commissions, insurance

premiums and an immense variety of services, besides paying for the

large imports which crossed the Atlantic from English ports. In the fall

of the year these payments would be more than offset by the enormous

exports of food-stuffs, cotton, tobacco, &c., so that during the first

half of the year exchange would be at or about the limit of 4.89-1/2 and

gold would have to be sent from New York to supplement the deficient

quantity of bills. In the autumn the produce bills would flood the

exchange market and gold would be sent from London as exchange got to

the other limit point of 4.84. These conditions are still very potent,

but latterly another element has entered into the position, and the new

development is so powerful as to reverse sometimes what we may call the

natural and legitimate movement in the exchange. This new element is the

more intimate banking and financial relationship which has been

established between the two countries. As American conditions have

become more stable, with better security for capital and an assured

feeling about the currency of the United States, bankers in London have

gladly allowed their banking friends in New York and other large cities

to draw bills on London whenever there was a good demand for sterling

remittances. We have, therefore, to consider a fresh type of bill of

which the drawer has no claim on the drawee, but, on the other hand,

incurs a debt to the drawee. To take a very usual method, a banker in

Wall Street, New York, will advance money to stockbrokers, investors and

speculators against bonds and shares with a 20% margin. He deposits this

security with a trust company in New York which acts both for the

American and English banker. The Wall Street banker then draws a bill at

60 days' sight or 90 days' sight on the banker in Lombard Street and

sells this draft to supply the money he lends the stockbroker. Two or

three months hence the New York banker must send money to London with

which to meet the bill, so that, whereas, in the case of a commercial

bill, the produce is despatched and in due course the consignee must

find the money for the bill, in the case of a finance bill, as it is

called, the bill is drawn and in due course the drawer must send the

value with which it is to be honoured. In any event the acceptor, the

London banker, has to pay the bill, so that it will be easily understood

that relations of the greatest confidence are necessary between the

drawer and drawee before finance bills of this class can be created.

The profit arising from the transaction we have sketched is realized by

the separate parties in this way. The New York banker lends money for

three months, say, at 5% per annum, he pays a commission of 1/32% to the

trust company which has custody of the security, a charge equivalent to

1/8% interest per annum. He draws on London at 90 days' sight and sells

the bill at 4.83-5/8, the cable rate being 4.87-3/4, the buyer of a

three months' bill making the allowance for the English bill stamp of

1/2 per mille and the London discount rate of 3%. The drawer of the bill

must also pay a commission of 3/16% to the London banker who accepts the

draft; this is equivalent to another 3/4% per annum in the rate of

discount, so that money raised in this way costs 1/8% for the trust

company, 3% the London discount rate, about 1/4% for bill stamps, and

3/4% for London commission--altogether, 4-1/8%; and, as the money is

loaned at 5%, there appears to be 7/8% profit to the drawer of the bill.

This, however, is on the assumption that the cable rate is still

4.87-3/4 when the bill falls due for payment and that the drawer would

have to pay that price to telegraph the money to meet the draft. But

exchange on London can go up or down between 4.84 and 4.89-1/2, and if

at the end of the three months the cable rate is 4.84 the New York

banker will be able to cover his bill at almost the same rate at which

he sold it and will only be out of pocket to the extent of the

commissions and stamps, so that the accommodation will only cost him

1-1/2% and his profit will be 3-1/2%. If he has to pay more than

4.87-3/4 for his cable at the maturity of the bill his profit will be

less than 7/8%, and he may even be a loser on the transaction.

It is obvious, then, that a high rate of interest in New York, with a

high rate of exchange on London and a low rate of discount in England,

would induce the creation of these finance bills. The supply of these

bills would prevent New York exchange reaching the limit point at which

gold leaves the United States, and the maturity of these bills in the

autumn would ensure a demand for the produce bills and possibly prevent

exchange from falling to the other limit point at which London has to

send gold to New York.

We have pointed out the essential difference between these finance bills

and what we have called produce bills, but there is another very

striking difference, that of the question of supply. These finance bills

are obviously very difficult to limit in their amounts; produce bills

are, of course, limited by the extent of the surplus crops of the United

States and by the demand for the produce in Europe, but so long as it is

mutually satisfactory to the big finance houses in both countries to

draw on credit granted in London, so long may these accommodation bills

be created, and the pressure of the bills in New York may depress

exchange so much that gold leaves London at a time when it is required

in other directions. In such a case the embarrassment caused by this

artificial drain of the gold reserve would much more than offset the

amount of the commission earned by the accepting houses. The Bank of

England may have to raise its rate of discount at the expense of the

entire home trade; probably, also, with the rise in the value of money,

consequent on the diminished resources, all investment securities fall

in value and more onerous terms must be submitted to by the government,

corporations and colonies, in the issue of any loans they may require.

It will, therefore, be appreciated that, although these finance bills

may be perfectly safe, their excessive creation is viewed with great

disfavour, and considerable apprehension is felt when the adventures of

speculators in New York make great demands for loans against stocks and

shares, and, through the instrumentality of these finance bills, shift

the burden on to the shoulders of the London discount market. The effect

of this is to level money rates as between New York and London, and in

the process the pressure falls on London and the relief goes to America.

Eventually, of course, the bills must be met and funds sent for that

purpose from across the Atlantic, but in the meanwhile the disturbance

of the gold supply is an inconvenience.

We have explained the process of employing credits granted in London to

finance Wall Street; there are, also, many other types of bill to which

the acceptor lends his name on the assurance that he will in due course

be supplied with the funds required to meet the acceptance. In the case

of the produce bills, a London banker will accept the bills in order

that they may be more easily marketable than if they were drawn direct

on the actual consignee of the cotton, tobacco or wheat. The consignees

in Liverpool, &c., pay a commission for this assistance and reimburse

the London bank as the produce is gradually disposed of. The transaction

appears slightly more complicated when English bankers accept bills for

produce shipped from the United States to merchants living in Hamburg,

Genoa, Singapore and all other great ports, but the principle is the

same, and the influence of such business on the exchange affects, in the

first instance, the quotation between America and London, but

afterwards, when money must be sent to London with which to honour the

bills, the exchanges with Germany, Italy or the Straits Settlements bear

their share in the eventual adjustment, the spinners, tobacco

manufacturers and corn factors requiring drafts on London where so much

of the trade of the world is financed.

We shall have to consider later the reasons which ensure to London this

peculiar and predominant position. We have so far used the American

exchange as an example to explain causes which produce fluctuations in

all the principal exchanges on London and to show the points between

which fluctuations are limited. The fact that America is still

developing at a much greater rate than the Old World makes an important

distinction between the financial position in New York and the financial

position of the big capitals in Europe. There is not in America the huge

accumulation of savings and investment money which the Old World has

collected, so that whereas Europe helps to finance the United States,

the latter country has so many home enterprises that she can spare none

of her funds to assist Europe. It would not be possible for London to

draw on New York such bills as we have described as finance bills, for

they could never be discounted there except on the most onerous terms,

and there is nothing in America which corresponds to the London money

market.

We have to deal with dollars and cents in America, with francs in

France, with marks in Germany, and different money units in nearly every

country; but, given the mint regulations, the theoretical par of

exchange and the theoretical limit points are arrived at by simple

arithmetic. An exhaustive statement with reference to every country

would involve an amount of tedious repetition, so that for the purposes

of this article it is more instructive to consider the essential

differences between the important exchanges than to go into the details

of coinage, which would appeal rather to the numismatist than to the

exchange expert.

The United States, offering as it does a vast field for profitable

investment, must annually remit huge amounts for interest on bonds and

shares held by Europeans; coupons and dividend warrants payable in

America are offered for sale daily in London, and at the end of the

quarters the amount of these claims, coupons and drawn bonds is very

large, and a considerable set off to the indebtedness of Europe for

American produce. It is often asserted that the United States is rapidly

getting sufficiently wealthy to repurchase all these bonds and shares;

but whenever trade conditions are exceptionally good in the States,

fresh evidence is forthcoming that assistance from London and Europe is

essential to finance the commercial development of the United States.

This illustrates a feature common to all new countries, and the effect

is that they make annual payments to the older countries and especially

to England.

A government loan or other large borrowing arranged abroad will

immediately move the exchange in favour of the borrowing country. A

tendency adverse to the United States results from the drafts and

letters of credit of the large number of holiday makers who cross the

Atlantic and spend so much money in Europe. When remittance is made of

the incomes of Americans who have taken up their residence in the Old

World the exchange is affected in a similar manner.

In one respect the United States stands far superior to most of the

older countries. There are no restrictions on the free export of gold

when exchange reaches the limit point showing that the demand for bills

on London exceeds the supply. New York (with London and India) is a free

gold market, and this is undoubtedly one of the reasons why money is so

readily advanced to the United States, and the finance bills, to which

we referred above, would not be allowed to the same extent were it not

for the fact that New York will remit gold when other forms of

remittance are insufficient to satisfy foreign creditors. When exchange

between Paris and London reaches the theoretical limit point of 25.32

(25 francs 32 centimes for the L1 sterling), gold does not leave Paris

for London unless the Bank of France is willing to allow it. By law,

silver is also legal tender in France, and if the State Bank is pressed

for gold a premium will be charged for it if it is supplied. Gold may be

collected on cheaper terms in small amounts from the great trading

corporations or from the offices of the railways, but a large shipment

can only be made by special arrangement with the Bank of France.

Similarly, in Germany, where a gold standard is supposed to obtain, if a

banker requires a large amount of gold from the Reichsbank he is warned

that he had better not take it, and if he persists he incurs the

displeasure of the government institution to the prejudice of his

business, so that the theoretical limit point of 20 marks 52 pf. to the

pound sterling has no practical significance, and gold cannot be secured

from Berlin when exchange is against that city, and Germany has, when

put to the test, an inconvertible and sometimes a debased currency.

There is no state bank in the United States, and no government

interference with the natural course of paying debts. On the other hand,

when monetary conditions in New York indicate a great shortage of funds,

and rates of interest are uncomfortably high, the United States treasury

has sometimes parted with some of its revenue accumulations to the

principal New York bankers on condition that they at once engage a

similar amount of gold for import from abroad, which shall be turned

over to the treasury on arrival. As these advances are made free of

interest the effect is to adjust the limit point of 484 to about 485,

and the United States treasury seems to have taken a leaf out of the

book of the German Reichsbank, which frequently offers similar

facilities to gold importers and creates an artificial limit point in

the Berlin Exchange. The Reichsbank gives credit in Berlin for gold that

has only got as far as Hamburg, and sometimes gives so many days' credit

that the agent in London of German banking houses can afford an

extravagant price for bar gold and even risk the loss in weight on a

withdrawal of sovereigns, although the exchange may not have fallen to

the other limit point of 20.32. In England the only effort that is made

to attract gold is some action by the Bank of England in the direction

of raising discount rates; occasionally, also, the bank outbids other

purchasers for the arrivals of raw gold from South Africa, Australia and

other mining countries. Quite exceptionally, for instance during the

Boer War, the Bank of England allowed advances free of interest against

gold shipped to London.

Many of the principal banking houses in all the important capitals

receive continually throughout the day telegraphic information of the

tendency and movement of all the exchanges, and on the smallest margin

of profit a large business is done in what is called arbitrage (q.v.).

For instance, cheques or bills on London will be bought by X in Paris

and remitted to Y in London. X will recoup himself by selling a cable

payment on Z in New York. Z will put himself in funds to meet the cable

payment by selling 60 days' sight drafts on Y, who pays the 60 days'

drafts at maturity out of the proceeds of the cheques or bills received

from Paris, and this complicated transaction, involving no outlay of

capital, must show some minute profit after all expense of bill stamps,

discount, cables and commissions has been allowed for. Such business is

very difficult and very technical. The arbitrageur must be in

first-class credit, must make the most exact calculation, and be prompt

to take advantage of the small differences in exchange, differences

which can be only temporary, as these operations soon bring about an

adjustment.

The European exchanges with which London is chiefly concerned are Paris

and Berlin, through which centres most of the financial business of the

rest of Europe is conducted; for example, Scandinavia, Russia and

Austria bank more largely with Berlin than elsewhere. Italy,

Switzerland, Belgium and Spain bank chiefly in Paris. European claims on

London or debts to London are settled mostly through Germany or France,

and consequently the German and French rates of exchange are affected by

the relation of England with the rest of the Continent. The exchanges on

Paris and Berlin are therefore most carefully watched by all those big

interests which are concerned with the rate of discount and the value of

money in London.

If the Paris cheque falls to 25.12, gold arrivals in the London bullion

market will be taken by French bankers unless the profit shown by the

exchange on some other country enables other buyers to pay more for the

gold than Paris can afford. If the Paris cheque falls still further, it

would pay to take sovereigns from the Bank of England for export, and so

much would be taken as would satisfy the demand to send money to France,

or until the consequent scarcity of money in London made rates of

interest so high in England that French bankers would prefer to leave

money and perhaps increase their balances. As between London and Paris

and Berlin the greatest factor operating the exchanges is the relative

value of money in the three centres. There is no great excess of trade

balance at any season in favour of Germany or France and against

England. On the other hand the banking relations between those countries

are very intimate, and if funds can be very profitably employed in one

of these places, there will be a good demand for remittance, and

exchange will move in favour of that place, that is to say, exchange

will go towards that limit point at which gold will be sent. The great

pastoral and agricultural countries like South America, Egypt and India

are in a position to draw very largely on London when their crops or

other products are ready for shipment. In the early months of the year

gold goes freely to South America to pay for the cereals, hides and

meat, and in the autumn Egypt and India send such quantities of cotton

and wheat that exchange moves heavily in favour of those countries, and

gold must go to adjust the trade balance. During the rest of the year

the gold tends to return as these countries always require bills on

London or some form of payment to meet interest and dividends on

European money invested in their government debts, railways and trading

enterprises, and to pay for the European manufactures which they import.

Exchange then moves in favour of England, and the Bank of England can

replenish its reserve. Over the greater part of the world the rate of

exchange on London is an indication simply of the trade balance. The

greater part of the world receives payment for food stuffs, and has to

pay for European manufactures, shipping freights, banking services and

professional commissions.

The greatest complication in exchange questions arises when we have to

deal with a country employing a silver standard, and, fortunately for

the development of trade, this problem has disappeared of late years in

the case of India, Ceylon, Japan, Mexico and the Straits Settlements,

and now the only important country using silver as a standard is China.

When the monetary standard in one country is only a commodity in another

country we are as far removed from the ideal of an international

currency as can be imagined. We can fix no limit points to the exchange

and we cannot settle any theoretical par of exchange. The price of

silver in the gold-using country may vary as much as the price of copper

or tin, and in the silver-using country gold is dealt in just as any

other metal. In both cases the only metal of constant price is the metal

which is used as the money standard. The easiest method of explaining

the position is to consider that any one in a gold-using country having

a claim in currency on a silver-using country has to offer for sale so

many ounces of silver, and vice versa the exporter in a silver-using

country sending produce to London has to offer a draft representing so

many ounces of gold. This introduces a very unsatisfactory element. To

take a practical example:--a tea-grower in China has raised his crop in

spite of the usual experience of weather and labour difficulties and the

endless risks that a planter must face; the tea is then sent to London

to take its chance of good or bad prices, and at the same time the

planter has a draft to sell representing locally a certain weight of

gold; now, in addition to all the risks of weather and trading

conditions, and the chances of the fluctuations in the tea market, he is

compelled to gamble in the metal market on the price of gold. Some years

ago when a large number of important countries employed a silver

standard it was seriously suggested that a fixed ratio should be agreed

internationally at which gold and silver should be exchanged. This

advocacy of bimetallism (q.v.) was especially persistent at a time when

silver had suffered a very great fall in price and the prominent

exponents could generally be identified either as extremely practical

men who were interested in the price of silver, or as very inexperienced

theorists. The difficulty of the two standards was successfully solved

by discarding the use of silver, and the chief silver-using countries

adopted a gold standard which has given greater security for the

investment of foreign capital, has simplified business and brought about

a large increase of trade.

In the case of a country of which the government has been subject to

great financial difficulties, gold has been shipped to satisfy foreign

creditors so long as the supply held out, and the exchange with such a

country will continue to move adversely with every fresh political

embarrassment and any other economic cause reflecting on the national

credit. With the collapse of the monarchy in Brazil the value of the

milreis fell from 27d. to 5d., and all the Spanish-American countries

have from time to time afforded most distressing examples of the

demoralizing effects on the currency of unstable and reckless

administration. In Europe similar results have been shown by the

mistrust inspired by the governments of Spain, Greece, Italy and some

other states. The raising of revenue by the use of the printing press

creates an inconvertible and depreciating paper currency which frightens

foreign capital and severely taxes the unfortunate country which must

make payment abroad for the service of debt and other obligations. With

the tardy appreciation of the old proverb that "honesty is the best

policy" nearly every country of importance has made strenuous efforts to

improve the integrity of its money.

Exchange quotations are not published from many of the British colonies,

as their financial business is in the hands of a comparatively few

excellently managed banks, which establish, by agreement, conventional

exchanges fixed for a considerable period, notably in the case of

Australia, New Zealand and South Africa. The Scottish and Irish banks

supply similar examples of a monopoly in exchange.

Encyclopaedia Britannica, 11th Edition, "Evangelical Church Conference" to "Fairbairn, Sir William" Volume 10, Slice 1 · 第 2 / 10 章