Now, it is perfectly clear that, if the pound weight of bullion were divided into a greater number of pieces than 240, that greater number would still be equal to the pound weight, and if we denoted by the symbol £, 240 pieces, or pence, irrespective of their weight, we should have the 1 lb. equal to 1 £, + the number of pieces above 240. Now, this is what has been done in the coinage of all the three countries above-mentioned. The Sovereigns of these countries were frequently in want of money to pursue their various extravagances, and, as they could not make more money, they adopted the fraudulent and surreptitious plan of cutting the pound weight of bullion into a greater number of pieces, but they still called them by the same name. By this means they gained an illusory augmentation of wealth. As they could not multiply the quantity of the metal, they at various periods falsified the certificate. While they still called their coins by the same name, they diminished the quantity of bullion in them, and so coined more than the original number of pence out of a pound weight of bullion. The consequence of this was very manifest. As 240 pence were still called a pound or £, in money, whatever their weight was, and as more than 240 pence were coined out of a pound of bullion, the £, or pound of money, began to vary from the lb., or pound of bullion. This falsification of the certificate increased till the time of Elizabeth, when, instead of 240 pence, or 20 shillings, being coined out of the pound weight of bullion, no less than 62 shillings, or 744 pence, were coined out of it. Then we have manifestly Now, as there are 12 ounces in one pound weight of bullion, it is evident that each ounce of bullion was coined into 62 pence, and hence, as the value of bullion is measured by the ounce, the Mint Price of silver was said to be 5s. 2d. the ounce. Afterwards gold was used as a measure of value concurrently with silver, and gold pieces were struck and made to pass current as nearly as could be done at the value corresponding to the market values of gold and silver. Thus there was for a considerable time a double standard. The celebrated Locke, however, had pointed out that a double standard was improper, and that there ought to be only one standard in a country. Sir Isaac Newton also pointed out in 1717, that the coins were then improperly rated according to the market value of gold and silver, and that the effect of this would necessarily be to drive silver out of circulation. In consequence of his representations, the value of the gold coin was reduced, but not to a sufficient extent, and the consequence which he predicted took place. In consequence of gold, in coin, being still overrated, in comparison with its relative market value to silver, merchants, during the course of the last century, adopted the universal custom of paying their bills in gold coin in preference to silver, and thus gold became gradually to be considered as the measure of value in England. In 1816, this custom was adopted as the law, and gold was declared to be the only legal measure of value, and the pound, the legal tender, or measure of value, became the equivalent in gold of 20s. in silver. The pound weight of gold bullion was ordered to be cut into 46 pieces of the value of 20s. or £1 each, with a piece over, equal to 14-20ths and 6-12ths of 1-20th, or the Mint Price of 1 lb. of gold was fixed at £46 14s. 6d. But, as the value of gold is estimated by the ounce, the Mint Price of gold is fixed at £3 17s. 101d. per ounce, and, as long as the coins are ordered to be coined of the same weight, the Mint Price cannot vary. It would be out of place here to give a history of the Coinage of England and Scotland, but those who may feel an interest in the subject will find it in our Dictionary of Political Economy. But it is useful to have a table of the successive depreciations of the coinages of these countries to refer to, we therefore subjoin one. It will be seen that in England the silver coinage is depreciated to the extent of 36 to 1, compared to what it was at the time of the Conquest. In Scotland the last depreciation of the silver took place in 1738, when the lb.weight of silver bullion was coined into £37 4s. in money. In France, the depreciation proceeded to greater lengths still. The extraordinary variations in the Mint Price of gold and silver are much too long to be inserted here, but they will be found in our Dictionary, Art. Coinage of France. It is sufficient to say that at the time of the Revolution the pound, or livre,. had been reduced in weight to the modern franc, which was adopted as the basis of a Decimal Coinage. Silver Coinages, the Purity of the Metal, and the Ratio of Gold from the Conquest to the present time. 1 9 4 11 18 18 0 1 6 17 12 0 11 1 17 22 1306 1366 0 0 9 12 0 13 0 0 11 0 0 1 0 0144 0 0 10 5 8 6 18 0 0 On a DOUBLE STANDARD. 17. We have seen that a large number of eminent writers have observed that the fundamental idea of Currency is debt; and that specie is, in fact, only the most general form in which this is recorded and transferred. That portion of the Currency which a debtor can compel his creditor to receive as payment of the debt due from him, and as, in fact, a means of obtaining any services he may require from some else, is called MONEY, or LEGAL TENDER, and sometimes the measure or standard of value. When coins are struck of two different metals, and each is made indiscriminately legal tender to an unlimited amount, there is said to be a double standard. Silver money was, at the time of the conquest, the only legal tender. Afterwards, in the reign of Edward III., gold money was coined to be as nearly as possible equal in value, to a certain amount of silver money, and, for several centuries, they were each legal tender in discharge of any amount of debt. It would seem apparently to be very convenient to have money of both metals. The gold for large payments, and the silver for smaller ones. Nevertheless, there are certain fundamental objections to having both metals as legal tender to any amount. We have observed that it is a fundamental law of the coinage, found to be absolutely true in all ages and countries, that good and bad coins cannot circulate together, but that the bad coin drives the good coin from circulation. That is to say, that the one which is overrated, expels the one that is underrated. Exactly the same consequence follows if the coins be made of different metals. Gold and silver have value with respect to each other, just as any other commodities have; and this value is constantly changing in the market of the world; though, no doubt, in a minute degree. Now, coins of gold and silver may be issued at a fixed relative value, which may be true at the time of issue; but the value of the metals is constantly changing in the open market, and hence, the mint value of the coins never remains for any length of time in proper adjustment with their market value; and, consequently, the inevitable result happens, the coin that is |