the high price of bullion- 第3部分

exchange　for　their　corn；　and　it　would　be　necessary　for　him　to



show；　that　if　such　an　unwillingness　were　to　exist；　we　should



agree　to　indulge　it　so　far　as　to　consent　to　part　with　our　coin。



　　　　If　we　consent　to　give　coin　in　exchange　for　goods；　it　must　be



from　choice；　not　necessity。　We　should　not　import　more　goods　than



we　export；　unless　we　had　a　redundancy　of　currency；　which　it



therefore　suits　us　to　make　a　part　of　our　exports。　The　exportation



of　the　coin　is　caused　by　its　cheapness；　and　is　not　the　effect；



but　the　cause　of　an　unfavourable　balance；　we　should　not　export



it；　if　we　did　not　send　it　to　a　better　market；　or　if　we　had　any



commodity　which　we　could　export　more　profitably。　It　is　a　salutary



remedy　for　a　redundant　currency；　and　as　I　have　already



endeavoured　to　prove；　that　redundancy　or　excess　is　only　a



relative　term；　it　follows；　that　the　demand　for　it　abroad　arises



only　from　the　comparative　deficiency　of　the　currency　of　the



importing　country；　which　there　causes　its　superior　value。



　　　　It　resolves　itself　entirely　into　a　question　of　interest。　If



the　sellers　of　the　corn　to　England；　to　the　amount　I　will　suppose



of　a　million；　could　import　goods　which　cost　a　million　in　England；



but　would　produce；　when　sold　abroad；　more　than　if　the　million　had



been　sent　in　money；　goods　would　be　preferred；　if　otherwise；　money



would　be　demanded。



　　　　It　is　only　after　a　comparison　of　the　value　in　their　markets



and　in　our　own；　of　gold　and　other　commodities；　and　because　gold



is　cheaper　in　the　London　market　than　in　theirs；　that　foreigners



prefer　gold　in　exchange　for　their　corn。　If　we　diminish　the



quantity　of　currency；　we　give　an　additional　value　to　it：　this



will　induce　them　to　alter　their　election；　and　prefer　the



commodities。　If　I　owed　a　debt　in　Hamburgh　of　100　l。　I　should



endeavour　to　find　out　the　cheapest　mode　of　paying　it。　If　I　send



money；　the　expence　attending　its　transportation　being　I　will



suppose　5　l。　to　discharge　my　debt　will　cost　me　105　l。　If　I



purchase　cloth　here；　which；　with　the　expences　attending　its



exportation；　will　cost　me　106　l。　and　which　will；　in　Hamburgh；



sell　for　100　l。　it　is　evidently　more　to　my　advantage　to　send　the



money。　If　the　purchase　and　expences　of　sending　hardware　to　pay　my



debt；　will　take　107　l。　I　should　prefer　sending　cloth　to　hardware；



but　I　would　send　neither　in　preference　to　money；　because　money



would　be　the　cheapest　exportable　commodity　in　the　London　market。



The　same　reasons　would　operate　with　the　exporter　of　the　corn；　if



the　transaction　were　on　his　own　account。　But　if　the　Bank；



〃fearful　for　the　safety　of　their　establishment；〃　and　knowing　that



the　requisite　number　of　guineas　would　be　withdrawn　from　their



coffers　at　the　mint　price；　should　think　it　necessary　to　diminish



the　amount　of　their　notes　in　circulation；　the　proportion　between



the　value　of　the　money；　of　the　cloth；　and　of　the　hardware；　would



no　longer　be　as　105；　106；　and　107；　but　the　money　would　become　the



most　valuable　of　the　three；　and　therefore　would　be　less



advantageously　employed　in　discharging　the　foreign　debts。



　　　　If；　which　is　a　much　stronger　case；　we　agreed　to　pay　a　subsidy



to　a　foreign　power；　money　would　not　be　exported　whilst　there　were



any　goods　which　could　more　cheaply　discharge　the　payment。　The



interest　of　individuals　would　render　the　exportation　of　the　money



unnecessary。（2*）



　　　　Thus　then　specie　will　be　sent　abroad　to　discharge　a　debt　only



when　it　is　superabundant；　only　when　it　is　the　cheapest　exportable



commodity。　If　the　Bank　were　at　such　a　time　paying　their　notes　in



specie；　gold　would　be　demanded　for　that　purpose。　It　would　be



obtained　there　at　its　mint　price；　whereas　its　price　as　bullion



would　be　something　above　its　value　as　coin；　because　bullion



could；　and　coin　could　not；　be　legally　exported。



　　　　It　is　evident；　then；　that　a　depreciation　of　the　circulating



medium　is　the　necessary　consequence　of　its　redundance；　and　that



in　the　common　state　of　the　national　currency　this　depreciation　is



counteracted　by　the　exportation　of　the　precious　metals。　（3*）



　　　　Such；　then；　appear　to　me　to　be　the　laws　that　regulate　the



distribution　of　the　precious　metals　throughout　the　world；　and



which　cause　and　limit　their　circulation　from　one　county　to



another；　by　regulating　their　value　in　each。　But　before　I　proceed



to　examine　on　these　principles　the　main　object　of　my　enquiry；　it



is　necessary　that　I　should　shew　what　is　the　standard　measure　of



value　in　this　country；　and　of　which；　therefore；　our　paper



currency　ought　to　be　the　representative；　because　it　can　only　be



by　a　comparison　to　this　standard　that　its　regularity；　or　its



depreciation；　may　be　estimated。



　　　　No　permanent　（4*）　measure　of　value　can　be　said　to　exist　in



any　nation　while　the　circulating　medium　consists　of　two　metals；



because　they　are　constantly　subject　to　vary　in　value　with　respect



to　each　other。　However　exact　the　conductors　of　the　mint　may　be；



in　proportioning　the　relative　value　of　gold　to　silver　in　the



coins；　at　the　time　when　they　fix　the　ratio；　they　cannot　prevent



one　of　these　metals　from　rising；　while　the　other　remains



stationary；　or　falls　in　value。　Whenever　this　happens；　one　of　the



coins　will　be　melted　to　be　sold　for　the　other。　Mr　Locke；　Lord



Liverpool；　and　many　other　writers；　have　ably　considered　this



subject；　and　have　all　agreed；　that　the　only　remedy　for　the　evils



in　the　currency　proceeding　from　this　source；　is　the　making　one　of



the　metals　only　the　standard　measure　of　value。　Mr　Locke



considered　silver　as　the　most　proper　metal　for　this　purpose；　and



proposed　that　gold　coins　should　be　left　to　find　their　own　value；



and　pass　for　a　greater　or　lesser　number　of　shillings；　as　the



market　price　of　gold　might　vary　with　respect　to　silver。



　　　　Lord　Liverpool；　on　the　contrary；　maintained　that　gold　was　not



only　the　most　proper　metal　for　a　general　measure　of　value　in　this



country；　but　that；　by　the　common　consent　of　the　people；　it　had



become　so；　was　so　considered　by　foreigners；　and　that　it　was　best



suited　to　the　increased　commerce　and　wealth　of　England。



　　　　He；　therefore；　proposed；　that　gold　coin　only　should　be　a



legal　tender　for　sums　exceeding　one　guinea；　and　silver　coins　for



sums　not　exceeding　that　amount。　As　the　law　now　stands；　gold　coin



is　a　legal　tender　for　all　sums；　but　it　was　enacted　in　the　year



1774；　〃That　no　tender　in　payment　of　money　made　in　the　silver　coin



of　this　realm；　of　any　sum　exceeding　the　sum　of　twenty…five　pounds



at　any　one　time；　shall　be　reputed　in　law；　or　allowed　to　be　legal



tender　within　Great…Britain　or　Ireland；　for　more　than　according



to　its　value　by　weight；　after　the　rate　of　5s。　2d。　for　each　ounce



of　silver。〃　The　same　regulation　was　revived　in　1798；　and　is　now



in　force。



　　　　For　many　reasons　given　by　Lord　Liverpool；　it　appears　proved



beyond　dispute；　that　gold　coin　has　been　for　near　a　century　the



principal　measure　of　value；　but　this　is；　I　think；　to　be



attributed　to　the　inaccurate　determination　of　the　mint



proportions。　Gold　has　been　valued　too　high；　no　silver；　therefore；



can　remain　in　circulation　which　is　of　its　standard　weight。



　　　　If　a　new　regulation　were　to　take　place；　and　silver　to　be



valued　too　high；　or　（which　is　the　same　thing）　if　the　market



proportions　between　the　prices　of　gold　and　silver　were　to　become



greater　than　those　of　the　mint；　gold　would　then　disappear；　and



silver　become　the　standard　currency。



　　　　This　may　require　further　explanation。　The　relative　value　of



gold　and　silver　in　the　coins　is　as　15　9/124　to　1。　An　ounce　of



gold　which　is　coined　into　3　l。　17s。　10　1/2d。　of　gold　coin；　is



worth；　according　to　the　mint　regulation；　15　9/124　ounces　of



silver；because　that　weight　of　silver　is　also　coined　into　3　l。



17s。　10　1/2d。　of　silver　coin。　Whilst　the　relative　value　of　gold



to　silver　is　in　the　market　under　15　to　1；　which　it　has　been　for　a



great　number　of　years　till　lately；　gold　coin　would　necessarily　be



the　standard　measure　of　value；　because　neither　the　Bank；　nor　3



any　individual；　would　send　15　9/124　ozs。　of　silver　to　the　mint　to



be　coined　into　3　l。　17s。　10　1/2d。　when　they　could　sell　that



quantity　o*　silver　in　the　market　for　more　than　3　l。　17s。　10　1/2d。



in　gold　coin；　and　this　they　could　do　by　the　supposition；　that



less　than　15　ounces　of　silver　would　purchase　an　ounce　of　gold。



　　　　But　if　the　relative　value　of　gold　to　silver　be　more　than　the



mint　proportion　of　15　9/124　to　1；　no　gold　would　then　be　sent　to



the　mint　to　be　coined；　because　as　either　of　the　metals　are　a



legal　tender　to　any　amount；　the　possessor　of　an　ounce　of　gold



would　not　send　it　to　the　mint　to　be　coined　into　3　l。　17s。　10



1/2d。　of　gold　coin；　whilst　he　could　sell　it；　which　he　could　do　in



such　case；　for　more　than　3　l。　17s。　10　1/2d。　of　silver　coin。　Not



only　would　not　gold　be　carried　to　the　mint　to　be　coined；　but　the



illicit　trader　would　melt　the　gold　coin；　and　sell　it　as　bullion



for　more　than　its　nominal　value　in　the　silver　coin。　Thus　then



gold　would　disappear　from　circulation；　and　silver　coin　become　the



standard　measure　of　value。　As　gold　has　lately　experienced　a



considerable　rise　compared　with　silver；　（an　ounce　of　standard



gold；　which；　on　an　average　of　many　years；　was　of　equal　value　to



14　3/4　ozs。　of　standard　silver；　being　now　in　the　market　of　the



same　value　as　15　1/2　oz。）　this　would　be　the　case　now　were　the



Bank　Restriction…bill　repealed；　and　the　coinage　of　silver　freely



allowed　at　the　mint；　in　the　same　manner　as　that　of　gold；　but　i