that "a vast and overwhelming portion of the civilised world would be at once financially united, as it were," by the adoption of the scheme which is to harmonise with "all foreign coinage and accounts whatever." Let us see. And let us again, for the sake of argument, assume that Mr. Rathbone's quasi decimal scale could be worked in accounts, and, consequently, in calculations re lating to the foreign exchanges. First, he conceives that the franc of ten pence would exactly correspond with the French franc, and the halfpenny with the French sou of five centimes. He takes the vulgar approximate computation of the franc at ten pence, and adopts it without inquiry or investigation. The weekly quotations of the French exchanges in the City article of The Times, which can hardly have escaped the notice of a man so prompt to dissect, might have taught him a better lesson as to the real comparative value of the French franc in relation to our money.

The florin piece of twenty pence will, according to Mr. Rathbone, exactly correspond with the Dutch florin. It cannot be supposed that a man so conversant with the names of coins, and who writes so confidently on the subject, can be ignorant of the laws which regulate their value in exchange. If he had given himself time to reflect, he must have been aware that there can be no real par of exchange between two countries, one of which has a gold and the other a silver standard of value; and that the relative price of the two descriptions of coins will fluctuate according to the production of one or other of the precious metals, and the demand for them, either for coinage or other purposes. Three years ago twenty pence might have been taken fairly as the average and approximate value of the Dutch florin. Now it is much higher.

The same observation applies to the silver dollar. Mr. Rathbone adopts some crude statements from the evidence of General Pasley before thé Decimal Coinage Committee, and fixes the value of the dollar immutably at fifty pence. Mexican dollars were sold readily in London the other day at the rate of sixty-one pence the ounce, which gives a value of more than fifty-two pence to each dollar.

He talks of the dollar of the United States, evidently in ignorance of the change which was made in the Mint law of that country in 1834, and which based its currency practically on a gold standard. The gold eagle, or ten dollar piece of the United States, is worth about two pounds one shilling of our money, which gives forty-nine pence and a small fraction to the gold dollar.

There cannot, in truth, be a greater mistake than to suppose that a mere similarity in denominations of account can have the slightest effect upon the calculations of foreign exchanges. Without identity of standards of value the use of common denominations creates confusion instead of afford ing facility for computations. We have an example of this in our North American Colonies, in all of which our denominations of pounds, shillings, and pence prevail, but in which the pound currency differs from the pound

sterling, and differs in each colony from its neighbour. When a sum is mentioned in any colonial account, it is always a matter of calculation to ascertain what value the pound represents.

There are many descriptions of dollars current in the world. The old Spanish pillar dollar, which has a peculiar value in China, and the gold dollar of Spain; the dollar of Mexico, and the South American States, which vary slightly from each other; the gold dollar of the United States, and the silver dollar of those States, which differs from the Spanish and Mexican dollars. There are, besides, the Maria Theresa dollar, the Sicilian dollar, and at least nine dollars of German States, differing from each other in weight and contents, of pure silver. None of the coins above enumerated are identical in value, and confusion is always created when they come into concurrent circulation at the same place. Not one of them coincides at this time in value with that of 50 English pence. What, then, it may be asked, is the dollar with which this vaunted scheme is to harmonise?

Mr. Rathbone has formed high notions of the effect of the example of Great Britain in the proposed regulation of the currency. Other nations, however, have their own ways and their own prejudices. We cannot even effectually control our own Colonies in these matters. Our great dependency of India has established a system of currency of its own, differing entirely from ours. Last year, after the discovery of gold in Australia, the question was raised at the India House, whether or not they should adhere rigidly to their silver standard. It was decided, probably on good grounds, as regards Indian interests, but questionably as regards Imperial interests, to exclude gold from their circulation.

But there is a difficulty to be overcome, independent of national laws, before such an universal system of concord as Mr. Rathbone contemplates could be effectually established—the difficulty of overcoming mercantile habits and prejudices. The tenacity with which merchants will adhere to old formula in calculations of the exchanges, rather than incur the trouble of altering them, is remarkable. The calculations of the exchanges between England and the United States afford a pregnant example of the force of such habits. The two countries have gold standards of well-defined quality. The comparative value of the coins of each is, therefore, easily ascertained, and the par of exchange could be readily fixed on that simple basis; but the Spanish dollar, which was the origin of the North American currency, was valued in the reign of Queen Anne at 4s. 6d., and that rate is still adhered to in the calculation of the exchanges. A fictitious valuation is first given to the silver dollar, which is then converted into the gold dollar; and this circuitous operation brings out the par of exchange at the nominal amount of 109 23-40ths per cent. In international transactions it is easier to adhere to an intricate process once learnt, than to adopt a change for the sake of simplicity.

Such is the result of an examination into the propositions contained in

this pamphlet, and some surprise may be entertained at the countenance which it has received among the mercantile community of Liverpool. But it has often been observed, that those who take the trouble of thinking for themselves are a very small minority of mankind; and a dashing and sparkling style of writing, which sweeps away, in a summary manner, the opinions of those who have been considered to have claims to respect, is wonderfully captivating. The reader enjoys the work of destruction, without reflecting on the merits of the structure proposed to be substituted. The pamphlet may be considered able, if fluency and vivacity of style can alone constitute force; but fluency is easy, if facts and principles do not stand in the way of the writer, and vivacity is a quality which is commendable only when an author's confidence in his own judgment proves to be well-founded.

(II.)

MR. F. BENNOCH's experience exhibits so satisfactorily the advantages of a decimal system, as contrasted with the present usages, that I have much pleasure in presenting a considerable portion of his evidence before the committee.

EXTRACTS FROM THE EXAMINATION OF MR. FRANCIS BENNOCH. WHAT is your opinion of the evils of the present system?-It is, in my judgment, a mass of evils and inconsistencies. It necessitates several processes of different calculations, where one might serve: for instance, here is the cost of a manufactured article, requiring four different calculations, and four different values, before we can arrive at the simple cost of 3s. 2åd.; and it is next to impossible, in our present coinage, to give an accurate result; we must have a small fraction on each item left over, which would not be the case with the decimal coinage.

Does the present coinage involve a consumption of more time than if it were arranged decimally?--Infinitely: this cost would occupy five minutes, while in a decimal system it might be done in the fraction of a minute.

How do you propose to effect this, and what alterations in our present coinage would you suggest?-In the first instance we require very few changes. Gold being fixed in price, and circulating at what is considered its intrinsic value, expresses its market price; but silver and copper, being circulated above their value, are in reality merely tokens. There is, in fact, so far as I can understand, no alteration in the relative value of gold and silver contemplated. There would be the same quantity of copper given in exchange for a florin, and the same quantity of silver given for a sovereign, that there is now. The alteration desired is only one of arrangement, to facilitate calculations and exchanges.

What are the real and nominal values of silver and copper?-The value of copper is, I find, to-day, 1s. -d. per pound, while it circulates at 1s. 4d. to 18. 6d. per pound; silver is 5s. to 5s. 1d. per ounce, while it circulates at 5s. 6d. per ounce; there is no fear, therefore, of the copper or silver coin being used for manufacturing purposes, while gold coin is being continually broken up; in fact, watchmakers and others prefer new sovereigns to bullion; they are sure of the purity; they can buy a quarter of an ounce, or sovereign, with 20s., without the trouble of assaying it, and I have been

informed, that several thousands are consumed weekly in the district of Clerkenwell.

What are the changes that would be required to make a decimal system work properly?-They are very few. One of the difficulties is, in having our unit of account fixed so high that it requires more coins than under other circumstances might be required. Still there are many reasons for retaining our unit of value or pound as it is now; and with the farthing coined into the 1,000th part of a pound, instead of the 960th, leaving the sovereign and florin as they are, we should only require another coin to render the system nearly perfect.

What do you mean by another coin?-I mean a coin of the value of 10 mils, or tenth of a florin; we should then have the pound, florin, cent, and mil. These four standard coins of account would, I think, be sufficient; to facilitate exchanges, it would be indispensable to have these divided into parts.

How would you divide them?—I would divide, first, the gold into three coins; i. e., the sovereign or 1,000 mils, the half-sovereign or 500 mils, and quarter sovereign or 250 mils; the silver coins I would divide into the florin or 100 mils, half-florin or 50 mils, and quarter-florin or 25 mils; and the cent, or whatever name you adopt, of 10 mils; in copper, I would have a two-mil piece and a one-mil piece; giving nine coins in all.

Is there any great advantage in having so small a number of coins?—I think there are many advantages; in the first place, fewer dies would be required, and consequently there would be less expense; a smaller quantity of metal would be required; and it would be more easily counted, there being less labour in division.

What would be the size of the smallest gold coin ?-About the size of a silver fourpenny-piece; and a small gold coin would be very advisable, for several reasons. The recent discoveries of gold are likely to disturb the relative value of gold and silver; and the more you can displace, or rather replace, silver by the introduction of gold, the less inconvenience will be felt; besides, if with one coin of light weight, say 1-16th of an ounce of gold, you can supply the place of five coins of silver, weighing in the aggregate nearly an ounce, the advantage would be immediately felt.

Would there not be an objection on the part of the public to being obliged to carry so small a gold coin in their pockets ?—I think there might be some objection at first, but the prejudice would soon be overcome, and the quartersovereign would become a favourite; a similar coin is now current in America. They have a gold dollar which is nearly one-fifth less than our 250-mil piece would be; it would weigh nearly 31 grains; and I find that so long ago as the time of Henry the Third, in the year 1257, we had a gold penny, which weighed 45 grains.

Might it not be objected to on the ground that it might be mistaken for a silver coin of a small size, in giving change?—That is one of the evils of